* heat sink <heatxsink@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> I thought one of the painful reasons to branch was that bug
> reporting wasn't being taken into consideration.
Yes.
> Granted even going with bugzilla is a huge step in the right
> direction.
Yes.
> But perhaps we should look at bug tracking with a lot more
> seriousness than what the norm is? So this project can take the
> lead with current xemacs, and even might set the tone for new ways
> of handling bug tracking. It is a serious aspect of open source
> development that most projects don't take very seriously. We
> could pioneer a way of automating it more efficiently. I'm just
> putting ideas out there, but from what Steve wrote in his initial
> email/idea fest I'm just questioning at weather or not current
> solutions are effective enough. Please understand that I'm not
> shooting down just using bugzilla standalone either. Just putting
> my two sense in. And really posing the problem, and really
> thinking if bugzilla standalone is enough?
I like your thinking. If BugZilla is the way we go initially (and I'm
beginning to think that it will be), there's no reason why we can't
come up with a better alternative in the future.
These issue tracker thingies are really not much more than a frontend
to a database, correct? I'm hoping PostgreSQL at that. So it should
be a fairly trivial matter to use or transfer the database to
some other new-improved issue tracker at a later date.
Who knows, maybe some sexy hacker will deuglify BugZilla. :-)
--
|---<Steve Youngs>---------------<GnuPG KeyID: A94B3003>---|
| In space, |
| No one can hear you rip a stinky |
|------------------------------------<steve@xxxxxxxxxxx>---|
pgp7cdUZ4JFTV.pgp
Description: PGP signature
|