Re: [xine-devel] Is the SF.net tracker a problem for anyone else?

[Reinhard T. <sir...@ta...>]

Bastien Nocera <ha...@ha...> writes:

> On Mon, 2007-06-25 at 13:55 +0200, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
>> Reinhard Tartler <sir...@ta...> writes:
>>=20
>> > Most bugs in both debbugs [1] and malone [2] are actually upstream
>> > bugs, which I would need to forward to sourceforge. I did so for some
>> > in the past, but I don't have the feeling that there is a change for
>> > them to be processed, so I didn't bother. Please correct me if you
>> > think I should continue forwarding ubuntu and debian bugs to xine's
>> > bugtracker.
>>=20
>> Does really no single xine developer want to comment on this statement?
>
> No launchpad please. It seems very ill-equipped to handle large amounts
> of bugs, and I'd rather not stuff data in there.

The text quoted above was specifically about continue to forward bugs
From=20the debian and ubuntu distribution to xine's bugtracker, which is
currently sourceforge. Your answer didn't match my question.

However its correct that I proposed to switch to malone further down in
the mail you mentioned in the References Line. As for your argument
about malone not being able to handle large amount of bugs: I don't
think xine has large amount of bugs, and moreover, in ubuntu, we are
able to handle several hundreds of bugs in malone filed against the
'firefox' [1] or the 'openoffice.org' [2] sourcepackage just fine.

[1] https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/firefox/+bugs
[2] https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/openoffice.org/+bugs

I can imagine some arguments which speak against using malone. However,
they have not been raised yet, and I have a very hard time to take your
particular argument about malone not being able to handle large amounts
of bugs well seriously.

=2D-=20
Gruesse/greetings,
Reinhard Tartler, KeyID 945348A4