Subject: Re: [boost] [trac] Boost v1.64 in the milestones?
From: Stefan Seefeld (stefan_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-12-17 12:51:42
On 17.12.2016 12:15, Paul A. Bristow wrote:
> I am also totally fine with Trac, and it contains history that must not be lost.
OK, so let me retract a little: if it were up to me I would *freeze* the
state of svn.boost.org, i.e. only allow those modifications that involve
migrating content over to github, but not new content.
>>> I believe you, but that's not the point ! :-)
>>> We have migrated our repositories to github, so we should use the
>>> *integrated* tools, rather than dispersing ourselves onto a lot of
>>> different infrastructure, which only increases the work and is prone of
>>> content getting out-of-sync. (As a point in case: look at the state of
>>> the (trac) wiki, which still refers to the svn->git migration as a
>>> future project.)
>>> If it was up to me I would establish a deadline for shutting down the
>>> entire svn.boost.org site and then work hard to migrate the remaining
>>> useful bits over to github.com/boostorg.
>> I'd think so too, especially since there are currently issues on both
>> sites, which imo is rather confusing.
> In theory I agree, but we need to be sure that GitHub does provide at least what we have from Trac ( I don't know how to use it for
> one), or decide what from Trac we can live without.
> We also need to migrate the history from Trac, IMO. It may be history but it is still invaluable.
I'm afraid of making this so complicated that it won't get done. The
Boost community seems to be so font on tools that it appears to spend
far more time and energy on discussing those rather than working on its
libraries. (At least that's the impression one gets from watching the
As I have said before, I'd really live it to the individual projects
what tools they use (Boost.Python has moved to its github tracker, and
no new issues on trac are allowed.) so all that remains to be done for
Boost as a whole is a little bit of coordination, which I think is
entirely possible with the tools github offers. (Hell, if I look at the
state of the original wiki I'm thinking that it can't get worse than it
> Perhaps we need something fancier like this ZenHub? (though at a glance it seems to have some very pretty features that don't look
> very useful to us as Boost?)
I'm again not sure who "us" is. There are tons of tools that can be
integrated into github. Why not letting each project pick what they need
and move on ?
>> Just fyi. there's a scrum plugin for github if the issue tracker is not
>> enough: https://www.zenhub.com/ That integrates throuh a plugin into
>> github and extends what you can do with the issues.
> But someone knowledgeable needs to sort it all out - including educating users.
Does anyone inside Boost use scrum or even just agile, and would benefit
from tools like the above ? It would surprise me if that was the case.
-- ...ich hab' noch einen Koffer in Berlin...
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk