Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 11:07:25 +0200 (CEST) From: Alexander Best <alexbestms@math.uni-muenster.de> To: Glen Barber <glen.j.barber@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: replacing GNATS? Message-ID: <permail-200907280907251e86ffa800005ca2-a_best01@message-id.uni-muenster.de> In-Reply-To: <4ad871310907271745p5414c773u3ae03f22e0746953@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
thanks for the link. although this wasn't the interview i was referring to the announcement is great news. i don't quite understand though why there's the need to create a completely new bug tracking system. is this due to technical issues or rather a matter of not wanting to use what all the others are using? or to be more precise: a matter of pride. quite often i've been thinking: dealing with freebsd in general could be so much easier if somebody just said: "alright! this is the way to go!" a lot of problems aren't really taken take of, but people talk about it for ages not wanting to let go of ancient software e.g. the freebsd mailman archive is a mess basically. searching within it either returns useless results or doesn't work at all. plus the index leaves out certain months or even years. there are so many good ways of having a clean modern mailing list archive interface. or another example: patches which haven't been tested enough to make it into HEAD. they end up either on somebody's personal site in freebsd.org/~username or what's even worse end up in perforce which is a nasty piece of software imo. or take bug reports in general. everybody's concentrating on adding new features to HEAD or participates in endless discussions about some unimportant technical stuff where basically everybody tries to show off their tech knowledge. there are PR reports with patches included which solve critical and sometimes ancient bugs, but nobody's taking care of them. i know people who've been trying to use freebsd since 4.X, but were unable due to a panic which has been analysed and patched. the patch however never made it into the repository, because nobody seems to care. it's no big secret that submitting bug reports is basically a waste of time. if you have a patch for a problem and want to get it committed into HEAD or STABLE you have to get in contact with somebody who has write access to svn. just my 2 cents. ;) alex Glen Barber schrieb am 2009-07-28: > On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 7:31 PM, Alexander > Best<alexbestms@math.uni-muenster.de> wrote: > > i remember reading an interview with a fbsd maintainer where he > > stated that > > nobody's happy with the old GNATS bug tracking system, but since it > > works > > they're keeping it. > > why not move to bugzilla or another bug tracking system? most of > > them come > > with GNATS_2_* scripts. > > switching from cvs to svn (except ports) worked pretty well so why > > not > > continue in that fashion? > Hi, Alexander > I don't know if this is what you were referencing about the > interview, > but there was a funded project announcement in June about this: > http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-announce/2009-June/001261.html > Just in case that's not what you're referring to. > Cheers. > (Disclaimer: No, I am not justifying GNATS over Bugzilla, cvs over > svn, etc, etc. It was unclear to me if you were referring to the > same > 'interview', and I thought I would provide a link.)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?permail-200907280907251e86ffa800005ca2-a_best01>