Randy McMurchy wrote:
Jeremy Huntwork wrote these words on 02/12/06 19:20 CST:
Randy McMurchy wrote:
[many things that show that Bugzilla might be better than Trac
for a bug-tracking system]
[nothing substantial in reply]
This hardly reflects what actually transpired. You did *not* show many
things about Bugzilla's functionality being better than Trac's. What you
did show was your opinion on several matters.
For example:
"a) I liked the field in BZ that was available for a relevant URL."
You liked it. Great. Wonderful. So what? Now in Trac you can include a
link *anywhere* and it is dynamic. Especially when you include them in
your opening remarks is it powerful. No major loss here, though I
conceded that it was nice having a special field for it. But the above
statement hardly shows that Bugzilla is more functional. It had a field
for a URL. Trac allows you to stick in dynamic URLS in every comment,
linkable to both external sources and internal items, for example the
wiki, or the source browser.
"b) The color-coding doesn't do anything for me. I can't see much
difference in Trac or Bugzilla in this respect."
Again. it doesn't do anything for you. So? This comment has nothing to
do with functionality. And, for what it's worth some people might
appreciate the color coding. Bugzilla had nothing of the kind.
"c) I would prefer the default to be a "task" rather than a
"defect" when entering a new bug in Trac. Most bugs (in BLFS,
anyway) are version increments, which should not be classified
as defects."
Opinions about preference, again. And what is more, this says nothing
about Trac's ability or functionality. You can make the default anything
you want. So, this statement, along with the others so far, doesn't
belong in a functionality comparison.
"d) I don't like how all the bugs moved from BZ to Trac that are
for version increments are marked "defect""
Again, preference and nothing solid about Trac's ability. So change
them. We have the power.
"e) I don't like (and this is the reason I created this message, as
I feel this is a large shortcoming) that you cannot reference
bug numbers when marking duplicates, and you cannot reference
bug number dependencies (I realize it could be done manually,
however, I liked the automated system in BZ."
Here was perhaps the only solid thing you said. And even with this it's
not that the functionality doesn't exist, it's just that it is different
than how Bugzilla handled it. So it requires change.
I didn't reply extensively before because you said in your opening
statement:
"I don't expect the following notes to be anything other than
conversation items. I am not asking to go go back to Bugzilla, nor
do I think we should. These items are mentioned in hopes that
there can be fixes or enhancements to Trac."
So you were expressing your opinion. That's fine. But don't ask anyone
to come back *now* and justify Trac's inclusion when there was
discussion, community agreement, a prototype in place for several weeks
(one in which you had both the ability to use and were encouraged to do
so), and finally no objections to the implementation.
And I'm done. I'm not going to say another word on this thread. Bruce,
Randy is your boy. If he continues to keep this thread going, will you
please field any further questions or charges?
--
JH
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
