Re: Why Emacs needs a modern bug tracker

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?=D3scar_Fuentes?= <address@hidden>
> Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2008 20:05:42 +0100
> 
> > 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.

> > 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.

Try the thread which started with this message:

  http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2006-10/msg00484.html

> 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.

> 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.