Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> The consensus last year among a group of us who examined a number of
> tracker systems was, IIRC, that Bugzilla had the best combination of
> features that people had requested. (And it does have some email
> interaction). Stefan Kaltenbrunner did some work on putting up a test
> instance and played with integrating it with the Postgres bug system
> - I forget how far exactly he got.
I tested Stefan's installation a bit. The main conclusion I got from it
was that the email interface was a late kludge. Even if it were
improved to remove the bugs, the fact remains that the emails themselves
are not the main storage.
> My understanding BTW is that debbugs is very specifically tailored to
> Debian needs, and is not suitable as a general purpose tracker system.
> And no other OSS project that we could find uses it. So, before we even
> look at it again I at least would want concrete proof that these things
> have changed. (Perhaps Alvaro has forgotten those discussions ;-) )
I haven't forgotten them :-) but from my PoV, the only important
argument against debbugs is that the code is not readily available. The
fact that it is tailored to Debian does not seem so much of a problem to
me -- I'm sure we could easily lure it into doing our thing.
IIRC Peter Eisentraut said he was going to talk to the guys in charge of
debbugs at FOSDEM, or something like that. I wonder if it materialized,
and whether something came out of that?
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
