> Hi all,
>
> I would like to define a modest feature set with a list of use-cases.
> Here would be my various criteria, were I to implement one from scratch:
>
> General Requirements:
> - KISS: simple to use, simple to change, simple to love.
I did not have anything simpler and more usable than bugzilla in long term.
It handles both small projects and large projects quite well, very configurable,
easily integrates with SCM (e.g. svn, git, etc.), have large base of
already made extensions.
> - allow anyone to report issues; do not _require_ creating an account
That will make a lot of spam bugs (tested). Bugzilla supports this.
Also, there was captcha extension somewhere.
> - designed to manage data orthogonally (e.g. wikis, databases, etc.)
???
> - easy to maintain (install, setup, back-up, redeploy, restore, etc.)
Bugzilla is easy enough and always forward-compatible (it is capable
of upgrading database structures usually).
> - easy to customize (we need to add boards, targets, interfaces, etc.)
Bugzilla is very flexible and really easy to customize.
>
> Command-Line Support:
> - ability to file one-step bug reports ('make smoketest')
> - ability to share patches/files quickly and easily ('make postpatch')
> - ability for developers to retrieve patches easily ('make fetchpatch')
> - ability to script interactions with the remote application server
> - allow us to write custom tools, such as to...
> - post a series of patches (or group of bugs) and then "link" them
Bugzilla has scripting abilities and various extarnal APIs which allow
your scripts to be not only on the same server as bugzilla, but from some other
(like one where your tests run).
>
> Web Interface Support:
> - NEVER _require_ developers to use the web interface rather than ML.
> - can publish all data and files on the web via readable permalinks
> - patches should be colorized and inline (and also as attachments)
> - files download with the same as the poster gave it! *peeve*
> - on-line forms for users to submit/view bug reports with releases
> - produce standard/custom project reports and graphs.
Bugzilla has various APIs which allowed IDE writers to integrate.
Eclipse, as one example,
I remember there were a lot. Use Google.
>
> Mailing List and E-mail Gateway Support:
> - from list to system:
> - detect "properly formatted" patches/reports automatically.
> - accept patches that pass review for style and clear unit tests
> - accept random/reworked issues forwarded for entry in the system.
> - from system to list:
> - send notices about additions or changes made to the system...
> - ...except those made by the incoming gateway processes...
> - ...well, maybe an 'added as issue #' confirmation for those...
> - ...or a systematic (i.e. objective) list of reasons for rejection
> - send comprehensive periodic reports with yummy statistics
> - from e-mail to system:
> - allow "properly formatted" replies to be detected and entered
> - accept patches that pass review for style and clear unit tests
> - allow other commands (e.g. majordomo, mailman, etc.), such as:
> - request standard/custom reports be generated in reply
> - from system to e-mail:
> - send confirmation of submissions made via any of the above means
> - send updates to watchers when changes are made to an issue
> - send reminder e-mails for inactive issues
> - send out text or HTML of standard/custom reports
Bugzilla is able to manage everything through email, including
openning and closing of bugs,
commenting them. This allows also various robotics to be implemented
through email.
>
> Basically, I want a double-trifecta: CLI, Web, and E-mail interfaces for
> Bugs, Patches, and Content Tracking. I want to use each interface to
> the best of its advantage for the task at hand; by using patches alone,
> I listed enough use-cases for each UI to put a sharp tip on this point.
> Given my specification, no system does this as well as it could, based
> on my past experience with numerous tracking systems.
Bugzilla is the best suitable for your criteria. It might be hard to install
(because you request a lot of features; minimal variant is installable
in 10 minutes
by setup script). But have feature-by-feature approach, it works quite well,
and integrates into workflow of even very lazy developers quite nicely.
So, if set up well and proper commit messages, developer can lwt
himself never visit
web interface and only use email cna dommit messages in SCM to manage
bugs and workflow. People often choose Bugzilla over commercial bug
tracking sysems (like ClearQuest, StarTeem, etc) due to its ability to
get nicely into existing workflow without interferring too much
instead of
making bug tracker the central part of workflow. But if you want that,
Bugzilla is very powerful here, too.
http://www.bugzilla.org/
All the best,
S.
_______________________________________________
Openocd-development mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
