OK, thanks for these informations.
>From a user perspective, having this volume of devel mails flooding all the
>bugs mail is very annoying.
And following the status of a bug and the history of this bug is very hard too.
The bugzilla approach is really useful for the user who is reporting bugs: all
the bugs are tracked, you can see if a bug has been already filled and put some
additional informations if necessary.
I will have a look at the JIRA thing.
----- Mail original -----
De: "Konstantin Khomoutov" <flatw...@users.sourceforge.net>
À: "ycollette nospam" <ycollette.nos...@free.fr>
Envoyé: Vendredi 15 Novembre 2013 10:51:32
Objet: Re: Add a bugzilla website
On Fri, 15 Nov 2013 10:40:47 +0100 (CET)
> And the conclusion is ? No bugzilla tool installed because somebody
> want to build a gitbased bugzilla thing ?
Well, no, the real answer is that for those who actually write code and
apply patches, an e-mail based workflow is simpler: Git has tools to
apply patches right from Unix mailboxes, so one is able to just save a
thread with the final patch series to a file and apply it. Some people
also prefer discussing patches inline -- in the same e-mail thread
the patch series being discussed had started.
I'm aware of at least one big project sporting the same approach
to handling bugs -- PostgreSQL.
But there was an announcement that an experimental JIRA instance has
been set up for Git . I'm not sure what its current status is, but
you could look at it.
Also Git's mirror on github  supposedly provides for pull requests.
Again, not sure whether/how they're handled.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html