Re: Why Emacs needs a modern bug tracker

["Óscar Fuentes" <ofv@wanadoo.es>]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

>> > Not just evidence: you should volunteer to do actual work.
>> [snip]
>> 
>> ESR volunteered for implementing the DVCS and the bug-tracker. I
>> volunteered for spam-filtering and monitoring the bug-tracker. I can do
>> other misc things, such as pre-testing the system and later assist other
>> users on its use.
>
> Yes, I know.  But -- and please forgive me for being so blunt -- I
> have enough grey hair to remember a few instances in the past where
> people with good intentions said things like that.  Sadly, intentions
> are all we are left with to this day.
>
> I want to see some action, in addition to good intentions and more
> talking.

You have experience dealing with ESR. Don't you trust him?

I think that the reimplementation of VC that ESR just accomplished
involves an amount of work of the same order than implementing the
systems he proposed. I never was involved with ESR, but his offer seems
pretty credible to me.

>> > A bug tracker is a good case in point: Richard stated quite some time
>> > ago the basic requirements for his acceptance of such a tool, but no
>> > one stepped forward to do anything practical about that.
>> 
>> I'll be grateful if you direct me to the message where this requirements
>> were stated. I failed to find it on the archives.
>
> What did you look for?  "bug tracker" worked for me.

I'm using the search facility at
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/ and when I enter "bug
tracker" or "bug database" (quotes included) the result is

References: [ (Too many documents hit. Ignored) ] 

No document matching your query.

> Try the thread which started with this message:
>
>   http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2006-10/msg00484.html

Thanks! Reading it.

>> A bug tracker that is not updated by its users is worse than not having
>> a bug tracker. :-)
>
>     X done badly is worse than not having X... this is a general
>     justification for rejecting change, not for rejecting bad ideas.
>
> These are not my words, they're yours, posted just a few hours ago.

That is not the same case. There are certain tools that must do its job
well enough. If you usually search the mailing list for data about a
bug, the bug system is offering little gain. Basically, you are doing
more work than before: now you must look into the bug system and the
mailing list. Absurd.

But as I mentioned on the message you quoted, I think this will not
happen, as the bug system would monitor the mailing list and swallow
data from there.

>> The advantages of a living database over a static text file are too
>> large to enumerate.
>
> But the advantage of the flat text file is that it exists.

Seriously, I don't understand your attitude. Is like somebody were
asking you to take some risk.

-- 
Oscar