Brendan Jurd wrote:
> What's the basis of this objection to a web-based dev management
> system?
Beyond "the core developers want to stick to email", I think there is a
good reason that we should stick primarily to email for project
management: Bugzilla and similar systems are "point to point", whereas a
mailing list is multicast[1]. When someone submits a patch or a bug
report to a mailing list, any of the developers can see the report,
discuss it, and contribute to resolving it. More often than not, a
web-based interface like Bugzilla leads to a single "bug master", who
does most of this work by themselves. Besides the fact we don't have
such a person, it would also mean that knowledge of bugs/patches and the
discussion about resolving issues is distributed among a smaller pool of
people.
There is definitely room for improvement; submitted patches do
occasionally fall through the cracks, for example. I would personally be
interested in a "bug-tracking system" that is closer to a shared email
archive. Individuals would send mail to a mailing list and other people
would reply and eventually resolve the thread, as happens now. The
process would be slightly more formalized: there would be a way to
specify a few commands via email to close/open/resolve/etc. reports, and
some kind of interface (perhaps web-based) for viewing unresolved
issues, searching through issues, etc. But the point is that the current
system works well; this would just be a slight formalization of existing
procedures (we don't *want* a revolutionary change, nor do we need one).
I think the administrative overhead wouldn't be too high, either.
I'm not sure which existing systems fit this model (suggestions are
welcome) -- email needs to be the primary interface, not an afterthought
(as is often the case). Perhaps RT would work, I'm not sure.
-Neil
[1] Hat-tip to Andrew Morton's keynote at LCA, which made this point
effectively.
