sorry if it came like this: I don't have a preferred tool, Trac was only
an example of a tool offering a feature which I think would help Chris
(more than myself).
Actually, I'd prefer to stick to SF's own ticket tracking system,
because it's one thing less to maintain, but I'd agree also with the
fact that it's rather limited in its features.
So, conclusion, if you ask me today: let's stick to the SF ticket system
and do not start a new thread of discussion, where we still have so many
Ray Benjamin wrote:
> I think it makes some sense to use a better problem tracking system, but
> if we're going to do that, I think it would be a good idea to figure out
> what it is we think we need in one, and match our possible alternatives
> to our requirements. It's very likely that the one you seem to prefer
> will be the best choice, but it will be easier for everyone to accept
> that choice if we all understand why we are making it, and if we can all
> understand why it makes logical sense.
> If we can come up with requirements and a list of candidates, I'll be
> happy to try to gather information on them and summarize what I find. To
> that, we can add other people's individual evaluations and preferences.
> Hopefully, we'll all come to agreement on which one is the best.
> Eric Lavarde wrote:
>> Hi Chris,
>> to get the steam down: I think that Dimitry is referring to what is
>> documented in the bug tracker. I hope you will agree with me when I say
>> that you tend to not update/close bugs once you've fixed them in CVS (we
>> agreed on a procedure a while ago). Based on past conversation, I assume
>> it's due to you doing a lot of work offline (while travelling).
>> Despite my understanding of your situation, I must honestly say that
>> it's quite disturbing for the rest of us, and makes tracking of bugs'
>> situation next to impossible.
>> OK, if we agree on the situation, how to solve it now?
>> A workaround would be that you carry a list of bugs with you, and once
>> you've fixed them, and are back online, you update them accordingly to
>> your notes. With a bit of cut&paste and canned responses, it should be
>> doable with minimum effort.
>> A better solution would be a bug tracker with some offline capabilities
>> and/or integration with CVS (or SVN), so that commit messages can have
>> commands interpreted automatically by a ticket system. Something around
>> the lines of
>> What do you think?
>> Christian Foltin wrote:
>>>> The issue has been reassigned to Chris at the end of December, and there
>>>> is no progress until now.
>>> How do you know, Dimitry? Didn't you even tried it, before writing?