On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 12:27 PM, Eric Rubin-Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
> Ron W wrote: > > Do you mean automatic ticket sync between Fossil and an external issue > > tracking system? Or using an external issue tracking system instead of > > Fossil's? > > I guess I meant the former, though the latter is also interesting if it > can be made as nice as Fossil's internal tracker (in the sense that it > is easy to drill from the issue down to the check-ins addressing it). My impression of Jira is that it is designed to be able to integration with most any VCS. Since Fossil commits can be viewed via the web interface, then I would expect this to work nicely. > > FWIW, I originally found Fossil while I was looking for an easy to use, > > easy to setup issue tracking system that would not require involvement of > > the IT people. > > I'm in the middle of a debate about whether to use Fossil or git+JIRA. > If I can hook Fossil up to JIRA then any points about the superiority of > JIRA will experience significant erosion. > This looks very possible to me. > As a separate question along those lines, have people had other sorts of > trouble (IT, data sanity or otherwise) with git+JIRA? Our (my team's) concern was/is that IT's ability to cater to the needs of our department are highly variable. IT had one person who was able and willing to handle the needs/wants of software developers (in our case, SW for non-PC devices). Then she moved to another company. They since hired 2 others in succession, each one moving on, only saying that the new offer was better. If we were to use Jira, that would be yet another service to run on IT's servers as the closest we have to a server in our department is the project manager's desk PC. And that is primarily for his convenience in managing issue tickets. Otherwise, we rely on syncing changes peer-to-peer.
_______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
