On Nov 23, 2006, at 3:31 PM, Whisper wrote:
-- [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] The only problem I can foresee, is that the bug list could end up as a giant list of client side exploits and how to reproduce them, which although does not deal directly with HLDS/SRCDS, becomes our problem as server administrators, as we nearly always end up having to implement some sort of solution to fix it.
EXCELLENT point. Obviously the system would need the ability to obscure certain information. This could also be accomplished by a external<->internal bridge for valve, whereby moving things to their internal tracker, they could be removed from the external one (with an optional mark saying, "we've heard about this, etc.")
Do you have a bug tracking solution in mind btw? If so, which one?
Personally I think bugzilla is a good solution for this. I have experience customizing the system, am (very) familiar with the implementation language, and bugzilla really has unprecedented flexibility (except for some of the Rational tools, perhaps). Obviously though, a lot of this is weighing in on my personal experience - if there are other parties interested that want to chime in on the condition that they are interested in developing such a system, I'm all ears. To translate: I don't think it's worth throwing in your $0.02 on software choice unless you're willing to help customize the system.
I still have a rather long list of existing bugs. :)
I imagine you're not alone, but such is the nature of software development. -- Erik Hollensbe [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
