From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Bug tracking (was: new *Help* argument highlighting) Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 20:01:11 -0400 Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <20040611122633.5F88.JMBARRANQUERO@wke.es> <20040612040752.6887.LEKTU@mi.madritel.es> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1087084987 28139 80.91.224.253 (13 Jun 2004 00:03:07 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 00:03:07 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Sun Jun 13 02:03:03 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1BZISk-0007qM-00 for ; Sun, 13 Jun 2004 02:03:02 +0200 Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1BZISk-0007or-00 for ; Sun, 13 Jun 2004 02:03:02 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BZITZ-0007Y5-8J for emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org; Sat, 12 Jun 2004 20:03:53 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1BZISH-0006dT-0A for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 12 Jun 2004 20:02:33 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1BZISE-0006cJ-OC for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 12 Jun 2004 20:02:31 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BZISE-0006cG-KS for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 12 Jun 2004 20:02:30 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1BZIQx-0005F5-SR for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 12 Jun 2004 20:01:12 -0400 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.34) id 1BZIQx-0003N5-B9; Sat, 12 Jun 2004 20:01:11 -0400 Original-To: Juanma Barranquero In-reply-to: <20040612040752.6887.LEKTU@mi.madritel.es> (message from Juanma Barranquero on Sat, 12 Jun 2004 04:12:51 +0200) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.4 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:24894 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:24894 > However, using some special > "issue tracker" seems like doing it the hard way. Why? Why it is the good way for so many projects and would be "hard" for us? 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. 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.