Not sure if this helps, and I don't know the details or the mechanism, but I believe that John Wiegley uses org-mode as a bug tracking tool for his ledger app.
http://wiki.github.com/jwiegley/ledger On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 2:18 AM, Bastien <bastiengue...@googlemail.com>wrote: > Óscar Fuentes <o...@wanadoo.es> writes: > > > Using org-mode instead of outline-mode is a no-brainer. The only > > incovenient is org's complexity. A basic but effective use of org is > > straightforward but its extensive documentation may seem daunting for > > the occasional user. Maybe a paragraph or two at the beginning of the > > file explaining what's required for adding entries and doing simple > > queries would help those developers who don't know nor plan to use org > > for other uses. > > I will write a page on Worg about this. > > >> This is the basic workflow. Of course, permissions and other issues > >> could be refined but I think such a system is feasible. > > > > IMAO this setup is more complex and fragile than a conventional bug > > tracker. The idea may seem appealing at first for a group of veteran > > emacs users (those who insist on managing the bug database via e-mail > > because they refuse to use a web browser, for instance) but I'm far from > > convinced about its effectiveness. > > Aside from the scalability of Org wrt to big bug databases, I'm myself > only 50% convinced it's an effective setup. I'd be glad to work on the > remaining 50%. > > >> I don't think the size of the database would really be an issue for the > >> system above - but maybe I'm wrong on this. > > > > I'm afraid you are. Lots of emacs bug reports comprises hundreds of > > lines of stack dumps, plus e-mail discussions with lots of quoted text, > > etc. Org is great for notes, but is it practical for containing tens of > > thousands of bug reports, some of them made of thousands of lines? And > > you don't control what's on a bug report, they usually contain all sorts > > of text constructs and random characters. How well it would deal with > > bug reports about org's itself, containing excerpts from other org > > files? Wouldn't this confuse org? > > I don't know. Org is certainly not written for that purpose. But > cannot the dumps and discussions but attached as files? If so, the > Org database would only need links to these files, not the full bug > entry. > > > Nope, the 20MB is the bugs' text alone. > > Gee... > > > But attached files belong to the > > tickets and supposedly provide key information, so you can wipe them > > away to a place where they are not distributed along with the bug > > database. > > Yes. > > > I think org as a bug tracker may work very well for individual > > developers or for small groups, but not for open big projects such as > > emacs. > > Yes. In the setup I described in the previous email, no human directly > write anything in an Org buffer, everything is taken care of by scripts. > Which is kinda sick, 'cause Org is for humans. > > But still, I will continue to brainstorm on this, because if Org is so > useful for individual bug databases, there should be a clever and useful > way to *share* these individual databases and have a collective tool. > > -- > Bastien > > > _______________________________________________ > Emacs-orgmode mailing list > Remember: use `Reply All' to send replies to the list. > Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org > http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode >
_______________________________________________ Emacs-orgmode mailing list Remember: use `Reply All' to send replies to the list. Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode
