Greetings everyone :) I understand you are potentially looking for an issue management system to adopt. I'd like to throw it out there that you have a look at Tipit's forked version of Chili Project ( http://www.chiliproject.org ) which itself is a fork of red mine.
Keep in mind Chili Project is no longer maintained. In some respects I think this is a good thing as a community, such as Open Stack, would be prime to take it over and run with it. We currently maintain our fork ourselves. We have put a fair amount of effort into improving it - especially the e-mail integration and etherpad integration pieces. There is certainly more that could be done. But under the hood we find it to be a fairly flexible data model and pretty reasonable to work with. I would be happy to deploy an instance on a server at Rackspace if you'd like to login and have a look around. Also, here are our Git Hub repos: https://github.com/tipitnet/chiliproject https://github.com/tipitnet/chiliproject_tipit_mailgun_handler_plugin In summation, here are a few features it has that I believe align with what you're looking for: - Ability to integrate with OpenStackID - Option for self sign up - Multi-task features with tags and comments - Task dashboards - No timeout issues - Basic Restful API - Ability to efficiently track tasks across a large set of projects and branches (for our horizontal teams and sanity) - Add story ID workflow integration with Gerrit/Git - Incoming / Outgoing e-mail support - Ability to be puppetized/jenkenized hosted in-house at Infra - 100% opensource Let me know what you think :) J.P. Maxwell / tipit.net <http://www.tipit.net> Monty Taylor wrote: > > [...] > > We're looking at what our options are, and Thierry is examining them to > > see how tolerable their differences would be to our community. > > > > I propose that we have a solid answer and migration plan to put in front > > of people by Vancouver at the latest. > > StoryBoard was started initially as a proof-of-concept of what we'd > actually love to see in the tool we use for task tracking. I was writing > requirements documents to help the Infra team look into alternate > solutions, and finally decided that code could be worth a thousand words. > > At that point, people got very excited at the idea of having a tool that > would precisely map our workflows and processes, rather than having a > tool you have to adapt your workflows and processes to. Let's use the > POC today! Since that initial excitement, three things happened. > > (1) We realized coding the task tracking part is not really long or > difficult. It's all the boring infrastructure that is long and painful: > subscriptions, configurable email notifications, ACLs... > > (2) We did not get the surge in contributors we expected to get. The > StoryBoard API server is built like an OpenStack API server to increase > dev familiarity, but HP and Mirantis were the only ones to dedicate > headcount to the effort. > > (3) With StoryBoard being developed not as fast as we hoped, time > passed, some requirements changed, new teams have needs, and those are > not necessarily easily served with a beta tool. > > So we are standing at the crossroads again. > > First, we need to determine if we are ready to accept to use a tool that > is not tailored-fit to our workflows, in exchange for more immediate > gratification. That is what the "Biting the bullet" from Monty is about. > It's not an easy thing to do... after all the reason we want to move > away from Launchpad is the pain derived from using a tool that does not > fit our workflows and processes. > > Second, we need to see which solution is the closest to "being usable > for us", and therefore should be the way forward. When you work on a > single project team, it's easy to overlook that we have a pretty unique > set of needs in OpenStack -- the ability to efficiently track tasks > across a large set of projects and branches (for our horizontal teams > sanity). Not all tools can be used like that. In fact, before we started > StoryBoard, Launchpad was still the best tool for that. > > Personally I'm not totally convinced StoryBoard is out of the race. We > may realize that the amount of custom development needed to bring > existing solutions to a point where we can use them for task tracking in > OpenStack is superior to the amount of development needed to bring > StoryBoard at an acceptable usability level. But then, I don't > personally wield any significant development headcount, so I can't make > the choice: I can only define what "usable for OpenStack" minimally means. > > It's also worth noting that Launchpad is not (yet) out of the game. It > could grow the set of features we need (ability to auth using > OpenStackID, multi-task features with tags and comments, task > dashboards, no more silly timeouts, comprehensive API...). Unlikely, but > still possible :) > > I look forward to that discussion in Vancouver on the future of task > tracking in OpenStack. > > -- > Thierry Carrez (ttx) > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-Infra mailing > listOpenStack-Infra@lists.openstack.orghttp://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-infra > >
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-Infra mailing list OpenStack-Infra@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-infra
