bsag,

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 2008/06/14 21:03:
> OK, I should probably explain my thinking about this.
> 1. As Tracks has grown a truly wonderful community, I've felt a  
> responsibility to make sure that all of the resources are in the hands  
> of the community, rather than in mine alone. That way, if I  
> disappeared without warning one day, other people could pick up the  
> reins and it would carry on as before. Not that I'm planning on  
> disappearing, but you never know when you might be squashed by a  
> bus ;-). That was part of the motivation for moving to GitHub: it's  
> hosted by a third party, but also, the distributed nature of git means  
> that everyone who forks or clones the repository has a copy of the  
> entire repository and its history. So everyone holds the source and  
> the history of the project, unlike checking out a subversion  
> repository. So it was the hosted nature of Lighthouse that appealed to  
> me, even though it is closed.
>   

Though it's _possible_ to set up shared hosting for an OSS group, with 
the core team having server passwords (been there, done that) it's also 
generally a PITA: #1 sounds persuasive to me...

> 2. I have gradually diminishing amounts of time to commit to Tracks,  
> as will have been clear from my infrequent svn commits, and the  
> decreasing rate of posting on my blog. Trac is a bit of a beast to  
> administer, and I'd much rather spend my limited time actually writing  
> code for Tracks rather than up to my elbows in trac-admin. I just want  
> something that works, rather than having to spend a lot of time  
> hacking something else or doing admin.
>   

... as does #2

> 3. I want to make the barriers to contributing to Tracks much lower.  
> Again, that was behind the wish to move to GitHub, because forking,  
> merging and patching is so easy.

Well, I think that's probably more to do with Git, and would apply to a 
self-hosted git repo, rubyforge git, gitorious etc. The advantage of 
GitHub is that it's great for the "community" tools.

> After I got loads of Trac spam and  
> had to lock things down a bit, I have to manually add named accounts  
> (which is a real chore), so it is restricted to frequent contributors  
> and committers (same with svn commit permissions). Everyone else has  
> to submit tickets as 'guest', which is awkward and doesn't let people  
> take ownership of their own tickets. Lighthouse would allow that, as  
> well as giving other convenient ways of interacting with tickets (by  
> email, for e.g.). And it interfaces nicely with GitHub
>   

And Lighthouse has buzz -- and that may result in greater exposure 
amongst Rails devs than if you used gitorious+ditz or some other combo.
Sometimes :technically_best != :best ...

> Having said all that, I'm in no way set on using Lighthouse at all  
> costs, particularly if people in the community have reservations. If  
> no-one is objecting to GitHub, I'll go ahead and move the repository,  
> but leave moving from Trac for now. I'll look into Retrospectiva,  
> Redmine and even ditz :-) and see if that would ease the admin burden  
> and make it easier for people to create tickets.
>
> cheers,
> bsag
>
>   
Great. FYI:

$ ditz add
Title: Select a ticketing tool
Description (ctrl-d, ., or /stop to stop, /edit to edit, /reset to reset):
 > Look at Retrospectiva, RedMine, Lighthouse, ditz, todotxt.
 > Criteria: simplicity for day-to-day use, minimal admin, basic 
reporting, OSS status, avoid vendor lock-in.
 > .
Is this a (b)ugfix, a (f)eature, or a (t)ask? t
Assign to a release now? (y/n): n
Issue creator (enter for "Thomas Nichols 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>"):
Comments (ctrl-d, ., or /stop to stop, /edit to edit, /reset to reset):
 > Retro and RedMine do basically the same thing, retro seems rather 
lighter weight; ditz is **much** easier for developers to keep up to 
date (cmdline driven). ToDoTxt (on googlecode) is fun too :-)
 > Does Lighthouse allow export of all tickets?
 > .
Added issue elk-3.
You may have to inform your SCM that the following files have been added:
  bugs/issue-d37c24fb575218d39c53b0f13b7ea9666f02261a.yaml
$ git add bugs
$ git commit -m "New bug"


So apart from the (optional) HTML reporting, ditz needs no extra admin 
-- it's just bugs/*.yaml in git.

Happy hunting!

-- Thomas.

_______________________________________________
Tracks-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.rousette.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/tracks-discuss

Reply via email to