Re: Bug tracking (was: new *Help* argument highlighting)

[Juanma Barranquero <lektu@mi.madritel.es>]

On Sat, 12 Jun 2004 20:01:11 -0400, Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> wrote:

> I won't assume it is really good for other projects.
> I don't know whether they have thought about it carefully.
> Techies are often attracted to using the highest tech available
> whether it is better or not.

That's hardly fair.  The GCC people, for example, is having a discussion
right now about someday replacing CVS with another version control
software.  They certainly haven't jumped to the "highest tech available",
and in fact it seems like they'll decide to just delay the decision till
more, and more mature, tools exist so they can be fairly compared.

I can't honestly object to people saying "I don't want to use a web
interface", or "it's hard for me to use it for such and such", or "I
would prefer just an e-mail system", or "text files are the way to go". 
But I simply find incredible that, confronted with the fact that many
projects put web-based issue trackers to good use and express
satisfaction with them, the answer be doubting their word.  I'm
certainly curious about how many free or open source projects the
approximate size of Emacs go along happily without some sort of issue
tracker.

> It is clear that using a special "issue tracker" would be extra work
> for many people, and it would be hard for me to use.

Oh, I doubt it would be extra work for people, unless they decide to
invest the effort on it.  This is voluntary work, after all.  And it is
equally clear that, to-day, no one has decided to invest even the "modest
effort" in maintaining issues in a simple etc/ISSUES.PENDING text file...
so we're both on the realm of theology, right now.

                                                           /L/e/k/t/u