[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Choice of bug tracker

From: Dmitry Gutov
Subject: Re: Choice of bug tracker
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2023 12:42:07 +0300
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.13.0

On 01/09/2023 10:59, Hugo Thunnissen wrote:
Dmitry Gutov<dmitry@gutov.dev>  writes:
There is a sweet spot somewhere, but I don't have any scientific argument for
its position. Though if I try to imagine myself 10-15 years younger (rather
difficult), the grading would most likely be Github > Gitlab >> Bugzilla > mumi
Debbugs. Add a pound of salt, of course.
There should also be SourceHut on this scale, but I don't know where to put it.
 From the perspective of a zoomer (born 1997), I'll fill that in for you:
Github > Gitlab > Sourcehut > Bugzilla > mumi. Not that this reflects my
personal preference, but looking at my peers it is clear that they
overwhelmingly prefer the "pull-request GUI" workflow. Looking at
bugzilla I don't see what it does differently from sourcehut's ticket
tracker, but sourcehut is more than just a ticket tracker so I rank it

Thank you.

PS: I'm a little surprised that sourcehut is not receiving more love
here. Looking at sourcehut it seems to be the only forge where email
based developmen is a first-class citizen. It's also the only forge that
is licensed under the GPL and whose developers politically align with
the FSF. It seems to me that a better fit for the emacs project doesn't

They do have an email-drived workflow, but a somewhat different one ;-D. And they're moderately rigid about it. So that turned out to be a hard sell too, at least the last time it was discussed and considered.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]