On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Rob Weir <[email protected]> wrote:
> I'd like to reopen this question,since I haven't seen a resolution. > > I'm hearing some proposing Bugzilla, because of familiarity and ease > of migration. > > I'm also hearing some say that JIRA is superior. > > I'm not really persuaded by either argument. I wonder if we could > briefly drill down into this a bit more. > > 1) I read that the OOo bugzilla has been customized. Can anyone > explain the nature of the customizations? > > 2) In what sense if JIRA better? IMHO all defect tracking systems > suck. But I'm open to the possibility that some suck less. > > 3) On migration, would it be reasonable to attempt a sandboxed trial > migration of Bugzilla to JIRA, and let skeptics poke at it for a > while, to see if, for example, IDs are preserved, etc.? Would that be > much work? The easiest way to convince people that JIRA is possible > and reasonable might be to actually do it. > > 4) What are the downsides of Bugzilla? If it is a supported option at > Apache, wouldn't that be the obvious choice? I think we'd need to > make a good case for why an alternative would be better. What are, > say, the top 3 things that JIRA would do better than Bugzilla? > I can argually say that both suck, the issue tracker that I have seen easiest is the one provided by google code. The problem with that tracker is that I am not sure is doable for larger projects. The biggest hump of using an issue tracker is locating the right people (subcomponent) to get the issue to, or asigning a developer to it. whcih most times is not aparent. The previous OOo (Collabnet) supported templates which fill out your issue tracker in order to submit the issues faster. However I found not many people really used it. I can go to JIRA and find the feature list and compare it with Bugzilla, and I can see there are some minor advantages, but I agree that the familiarity of bugzilla is usually lower the learning curve for most people. I mean whats the point of having a better issue tracker if the users don't get it right away? > > -Rob > > > On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 12:44 PM, Dave Fisher <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > On Jun 16, 2011, at 9:17 AM, Mathias Bauer wrote: > > > >> On 16.06.2011 16:45, Christian Lohmaier wrote: > >>> Hi *, > >>> > >>> (to moderators: I guess the list software used checks on Sender, not > >>> on From - so if you need to review this message, please add the sender > >>> address to a "allowed posters" lists for both dev and notifications > >>> please) > >>> > >>> On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 1:03 PM, Marcus Lange<[email protected]> > wrote: > >>>> > >>>> I would prefer Bugzilla, too. We have already migrated recently to > this, so > >>>> transition would be much easier to bring it into Apache. And because > of > >>>> OOo's project size I would also like to see a new instance. > >>> > >>> Not because of project size, but also for the sake of preserving the > >>> issue-numbers that are spread all over the place, last but not least > >>> in the code itself. > >>> > >>> So whatever you choose, make sure that there is a way to get form > >>> #i1234# to the actual bug that corresponds to the id. > >> > >> Yes, keeping issue ids is the most important thing. Which bug tracker we > use would be a second order priority for me. > > > > There seems to be consensus. > > > > (1) We must somehow preserve the old bugzilla ids. > > > > (2) There is no clear preference on Bugzilla over JIRA. > > > > I think that we need to ask the infrastructure team what they think about > the situation. > > > > Regards, > > Dave > -- *Alexandro Colorado* *OpenOffice.org* Español http://es.openoffice.org
