Re: [sup-talk] Choosing a bug tracker for Sup

From: William Morgan <wmorgan-sup@masanjin.net>
To: sup-talk <sup-talk@rubyforge.org>
Subject: Re: [sup-talk] Choosing a bug tracker for Sup
Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2009 06:58:18 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1257173616-sup-9298@masanjin.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1257154664-sup-90@tilus.net>

Reformatted excerpts from Tero Tilus's message of 2009-11-02:
> Unless you take service, not the bare tool.  We are already using
> gitorius and rubyforge (at least to some extent).  I'd go for a issue
> tracking service that suits our needs.

I'm not dead-set against a hosted solution, but I am wary of making too
much of the development cycle reliant on third parties. E.g. I see
people who can't get any work done when Github is down. Well, that's not
Github's fault, per se, but they've integrated it into their process to
such an extent that they're now reliant on it.

Not to say that that would happen with just an issue tracker. But still,
our use of Gitorious and Rubyforge is pretty minimal right now, and I
feel good about that.

(And honestly I find Gitorious merge requests a little irritating,
because they're invariably not rebased properly against master and I
have to have the same discussion every time.)
-- 
William <wmorgan-sup@masanjin.net>
_______________________________________________
sup-talk mailing list
sup-talk@rubyforge.org
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/sup-talk