[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: bug tracking
From: |
Thomas Weber |
Subject: |
Re: bug tracking |
Date: |
Thu, 4 Mar 2010 22:22:29 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) |
On Wed, Mar 03, 2010 at 12:56:39PM -0500, John W. Eaton wrote:
> On 3-Mar-2010, Jaroslav Hajek wrote:
>
> | This was it, precisely. I was OK with the Savannah tracker. I thought
> | you disapproved of it.
>
> I remember not being completely happy with it. That was probably
> mostly because I am so accustomed to reading bug reports in email with
> Emacs, which is also what I use for editing code, so working that way
> is easy for me as there is no need to switch between applications when
> looking at a bug report and then fixing a bug. But at this point, I
> think it is more important to have a central database for bug reports
> with a better interface than an email archive. So I'm willing to make
> the switch.
>
> | In any case, I think that in order for the transition to be successful
> | we need to be strict and only fix bugs actually reported in the
> | tracker. When a bug report arrives at the mailing list, we shall point
> | out the reporter to the tracker. Anyone is free to transfer the bug
> | from ML to the tracker, but we need a handshake that it must be done
> | prior to fixing the bug.
>
> I agree with this, except that initially I think we need to be
> somewhat accomodating since all the current documentation and the
> bug_report function all point to he mailing list. We can be a little
> less forgiving once the next stable release is out and the
> documentation and bug_report function has been updated.
>
> | If we all agree to this policy, all what is left is to vote for the
> | tracker. My vote goes for Savannah.
>
> OK, I'm willing to try again.
>
> I will try to update the documentation and bug_report function
> relatively soon.
I suggest setting up a bugs.octave.org sub-domain and doing a http
redirect to the Savannah tracker. If it turns out that the Savannah
tracker is not the way to go, the documentation needs no change -- just
the redirector must point to the new tracker.
Thomas
- Re: bug tracking, (continued)
- Re: bug tracking, Thomas Weber, 2010/03/02
- Re: bug tracking, John W. Eaton, 2010/03/02
- Re: bug tracking, Jaroslav Hajek, 2010/03/03
- Re: bug tracking, Michael D. Godfrey, 2010/03/03
- Re: bug tracking, Søren Hauberg, 2010/03/03
- Re: bug tracking, John W. Eaton, 2010/03/03
- Re: bug tracking, Jaroslav Hajek, 2010/03/03
- Re: bug tracking, John W. Eaton, 2010/03/03
- Re: bug tracking,
Thomas Weber <=
- Re: bug tracking, John W. Eaton, 2010/03/24
- Re: bug tracking, Thorsten Meyer, 2010/03/24
- Re: bug tracking, John W. Eaton, 2010/03/24
- Re: bug tracking, Thorsten Meyer, 2010/03/24
- Re: bug tracking, Thomas Weber, 2010/03/24
- Re: bug tracking, Jarno Rajahalme, 2010/03/24
- Re: bug tracking, John W. Eaton, 2010/03/24
- Re: bug tracking, Jarno Rajahalme, 2010/03/25
- Re: bug tracking, Rob Mahurin, 2010/03/26
- Re: bug tracking, Ben Abbott, 2010/03/03