On 31 May 2008, at 4:07, Eric Davis wrote: > On Fri, 2008-05-30 at 15:10 +0100, Thomas Nichols wrote: >> We're using Retrospectiva -- not as feature-packed as Redmine but >> it's >> simple and quite well adapted for Agile dev; it's working well for >> us. >> >> http://retrospectiva.org/ >> > > The Ruby core just recently switched to using Redmine[1]. I've done > some development for Redmine and I really like the way it works for > me. > But it looks like Lighthouse might be used [2].
Yes, we're planning to use Lighthouse, partly because having a hosted ticketing app would make my admin job easier. Redmine looks very good though, so nothing is set in stone. >> bsag - are you also thinking of switching from svn to git, perhaps on >> github? > > It looks like it's already on GitHub [3], is that the "official" git > copy? Yes, might as well announce it here, I suppose! We are planning to switch to git, using github. The core contributors feel that it would make it much easier for people to contribute to the project. Currently, they have to create a patch using diff and attach that to a ticket. Then one (with commit rights to the svn repository) of us will apply the patch and commit it. That's often tricky if the head has moved on a lot before we get a chance to review it. We can give commit rights to repository if people contribute a lot, but administering that is a small but significant hassle. With github, anyone can either clone or fork the main repository, then hack away on their own local copy. When they've fixed a bug or added a feature, they can submit a pull request, and we can easily pull their changes into a branch, review them and merge with the master. Git's merging and rebasing is *much* better than subversions, so it should be much easier to do. In addition, it should be easier because of the forking process for people to maintain their own changes (which might only be of use to them) in a local branch, while also pulling in any bug fixes or other changes from the main project. If their fork is public on github, and if their changes are very popular, we can eventually pull them into the main project. The project also will get reach many more eyes on github because of their huge amount of traffic. Finally, github automatically creates .tgz copies of the head, so we won't have to do that manually, and people without git can get a copy of the head without waiting for a stable release (though this may have downsides too!) However -- and this is important -- WE HAVEN'T SWITCHED YET! I set up the repository on github (and the account on Lighthouse) to check out how it worked. Please don't fork that or clone that repository for actual use yet, because we need to switch over cleanly when we throw the switch. That will probably be sometime after we've released 1.6. I'll announce it here, on the forum and the home page when we're about to go ahead. cheers, bsag -- but she's a girl - the weblog of a female geek http://www.rousette.org.uk [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Tracks-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.rousette.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/tracks-discuss
