Re: [boost] shutdown ticket-system on svn.boost.org

Subject: Re: [boost] shutdown ticket-system on svn.boost.org
From: Paul A. Bristow (pbristow_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-01-13 07:12:32

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Boost [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Stefan Seefeld
> Sent: 12 January 2017 22:09
> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> Subject: Re: [boost] shutdown ticket-system on svn.boost.org
> 
> On 12.01.2017 17:01, Mathias Gaunard wrote:
> > On 12 January 2017 at 20:39, Oliver Kowalke <oliver.kowalke_at_[hidden]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> why not close boost trac for new bug entries while keeping the history and
> >> give the users the hint to enter the bug report in github instead

I'd go with that (with notice) - provided the GitHub bug tracker system can provide an equivalent way of linking reports to a
changes-in-this-version history that *should* come with every library.  

> > Some Boost libraries have Github issues disabled. That suggests the author
> > prefers to get issues through Trac.
> 
> The question of migrating issue tracking never came up formally.

I think I recall that it was discussed but put in the 'too-difficult drawer' for the time being ;-)

And the issue keeps bubbling up from time to time...

> So perhaps some maintainers simply took for granted that migrating wasn't
> an option ? I think it's at least worth raising the question.
> (Specifically to the library authors / maintainers. There is no sense in
> starting another of those endless tools discussions. Something as simple
> as a quick poll: "would you consider switching to the github tracker, or
> do you prefer to stay with trac ? Only answer with 'yes' or 'no'... ". :-) )
> 
> > In practice however, as a bug reporter, I've found that Github works better
> > to iterate quickly on problems and get them fixed.
> 
> ...in particular as it's integrated with PR reviews.

It's the natural flavour-or-the-year *assumption* with GITs ;-)

Paul

---
Paul A. Bristow
Prizet Farmhouse
Kendal UK LA8 8AB
[phone]