> On 8 Oct 2016, at 9:18 pm, Brandon Allbery <allber...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> On Sat, Oct 8, 2016 at 4:12 PM, Marcel Bischoff <mar...@herrbischoff.com> >> wrote: >> I for one don't understand why one would carry around all that baggage >> anyhow. Why not leave the old Trac as is and start fresh with a simple, >> reduced issue tracker > > When the simple reduced tracker is, as already said, too simple. It is in > fact the very "Only if it was really, really awful. But then they would have > changed it a long time ago." you already mentioned: yes, it's simple for you > the end user, but it doesn't do what the people who actually do the work need > it to do (and this is true across many projects, some of which have had to > build their own additional tooling to interface with Github and try to add > all the functionality it doesn't provide).
This might be the case, and i am sure can work if done properly if github and this external tool are properly tied into each other. What concerns me is the statement that in this migration to github, github and trac are kept completely separate, with no automatic linkage, but still contributors are expected to use both. I predict this is in the long run doomed to failure, as people will in the end submit github pull requests but forget about trac... Chris > > -- > brandon s allbery kf8nh sine nomine associates > allber...@gmail.com ballb...@sinenomine.net > unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonad http://sinenomine.net > _______________________________________________ > macports-dev mailing list > macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org > https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
_______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
