Re: Why Emacs needs a modern bug tracker

[Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr>]

On 2008-01-07 16:40, Yavor Doganov <yavor@gnu.org> wrote:
> Miles Bader wrote:
> > Useful email support means supporing both submissions,
> > modifications, and queries via email.
>
> Exactly.  This is not supported by Savane, so this fact automatically
> rules out Savannah as a bug tracker for Emacs.
>
> I wonder why nobody mentioned GNATS, the GNU Bug Tracking System?
> From the description:
>
> ,---- http://www.gnu.org/software/gnats/ ----
> | Thanks to its architecture, GNATS is not bound to a single
> | user interface ??? it can be used via command line, e-mail, Emacs, or a
> | network daemon, usually used with a Web interface.  Together with the
> | fact that all GNATS databases and configuration can be stored in plain
> | text files, it allows easy use and provides good flexibility.
> | Basically, if the GNATS tools do not provide everything you need, you
> | can add your own additional utilities using standard GNU tools.
> `----
>
> There was a running instance once upon a time at bugs.gnu.org, but I
> don't know what happened.  AFAIK the FreeBSD folks use it as a tracker
> for the whole distribution, so it can't be that bad.

As one of the people who used to be gnats-admin for FreeBSD, I can tell
you that it _is_ bad in some ways.

FreeBSD has a very active Gnats admin, Mark Linimon, who spends a *lot*
of time working with the members of the `bugmeister' team to keep things
going.  I am not sure if I could ever keep up with the work Gnats needs
to keep working smoothly, but Mark has been doing a fantastically
marvellous job for several years now.

Before using Gnats for Emacs, I think you should ask Mark about his
experience with Gnats the past few years.  I'm sure he has alot of
useful contributions to make regarding the goodness or badness of Gnats.

I have added Mark to the Cc: list, in case he wants to offer any help
regarding a choice pro or against Gnats.