Gilles Chanteperdrix kirjoitti:
Heikki Lindholm wrote:
 > Gilles Chanteperdrix kirjoitti:
 > > Hi,
> > > > GNA offers a bug tracking system which is undoubtely a useful tool
 > > for lots of projects. What about using it for the Xenomai project ?
> > It's more difficult to follow/search two places than one.
If for every real bug reported on the mailing list, there is a entry on
the tracker ; there is only one place to search : the tracker, because
it is a database, and much easier to search than mailing list
archives, provided of course we add the important fields to the
submission form.

There's the "if". What I've seen on sourceforge is that often times bugs that are reported on the ml don't appear in the tracker and vice versa, although the tracker can probably be configured to forward reports to ml, or? Who will type the ml-only reports to the tracker? Btw. would you only allow developers to file bugs into the tracker?

 > And this project isn't the size of openoffice or debian, so maybe the
> ml doesn't get cluttered by incoming bug reports.
Bug reports and FAQs do represent the vast majority of RTAI user mailing
list traffic for example. Answering these is time consuming, so since
our ressources are limited, any "productivity tool" is a good idea. If
the bug tracker turns out to be time consuming, we will stop using
it, but how do we know if we do not try ?

As I said I'm not strongly opposing. Go ahead and give it a spin - not too difficult to back out from that. Although, on the USER side, I've never preferred a bts (login req/learn to use/etc) to ml (e-mail client).

all the elements that would allow to solve the bug, so you have to ask
the same questions over and over again.

Isn't this what most of life is about anyway? :)

-- Heikki Lindholm

Reply via email to