On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 1:38 AM, David Pollak <[email protected] > wrote:
> Early in the process, I'd love to hear from folks about the good and bad of > various bug tracking system they use so I can use the good and avoid > pitfalls. FogBugz ======= Good -------- Extremley simple UI Few fields overall All fields optional Nice screenshot tool Easy to submit bugs via mail At least has the possibility to programmatically interface with the system to handle automatic bug submission and maintenance. Have had the time to implement this yet though. Bad -------- No total ordering of bugs only a scale from 1-7 Limited project nesting for categorization A bit too magical in the handling of feedback through mail Rendering of mail leaves something to be disired WRT attachments, and line breaks Weak support for Scrum-like estimation and followup A little to restrictive in what statuses issues of various types can have. Must change a feature to a bug to assign some statuses to it f.ex. Licensing scheme limits usability WRT a large organization of users requiring access to the current status issues in their area of interest. Regarding the last issue in the good list. A feature in our current system is to store user, time, rendered html and stacktrace when unexpected exceptions are thrown. Integrating this feature with the bugtracking system would be goolden. As you base this on lift I guess it would a good way to "sell" them as a package with this kind of integration out of the box. BR, John --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lift" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
