Re: [boost] Respecting a projects toolchain decisions

Subject: Re: [boost] Respecting a projects toolchain decisions
From: Dean Michael Berris (mikhailberis_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-12-28 06:25:52

On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 2:50 PM, Vladimir Prus
<vladimir_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Dean Michael Berris wrote:
>
>> 1. The signal/noise ratio can be hard to keep down especially if you
>> have a lot of ground to cover. Consider how you (or any other
>> maintainer for example) would want to manage a part of the 1000
>> tickets that are all in the same pile. Sure you can query it many
>> different ways, but wouldn't it be way easier to just look at 100
>> issues just for Boost.Regex than it is to spend some time looking at
>> 1000 issues that might be relevant to Boost.Regex?
>
> Michael,
>
> you seem to be making very strange points here. I have a saved
> query in Trac for all the components that I maintain, which is bookmarked
> in my browser, and once a week, I click "Alt-F2", type "Boost Trac", and
> examine those tickets without seeing anything I don't care about.
> Is there a reason you think this approach won't work for everybody? Like,
> is there a web browser that lacks bookmarks functionality?
>

Sure, but the whole point that you have a central place to query the
information is what's broken -- especially if you have to resort to
these "hacks" just to filter out what's important for you.

Imagine if you had one issue tracker per Boost library. Then you don't
have to worry about crafting the queries to get the relevant
information in the first place. And then it's going to be easier to
develop milestones per library than creating one big milestone and
having one giant release. You can then have different workflows per
Boost library depending on what the developers of the library are
comfortable with.

The idea that you have a single place for everything and "just one
way" to do things is really what I'm having an issue with. Sure we can
set up standards that people follow already -- especially when it
comes to code, license, etc. -- but asking everyone to follow the same
development pace and congregate on one single repository and issue
tracker is sounding like the "cathedral" model than the "bazaar"
model.

I for one like the bazaar. ;)

HTH

-- 
Dean Michael Berris
about.me/deanberris