Re: [boost] Boost Trac, random, No-Maintainer?

Subject: Re: [boost] Boost Trac, random, No-Maintainer?
From: Peter Dimov (lists_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-10-09 11:22:46

Stefan Seefeld wrote:
> On 08.10.2017 22:14, James E. King, III via Boost wrote:
> > My personal preference would be to require github issues be enabled and 
> > used for all official boostorg repositories, and that trac be deprecated 
> > and accept no new issues.

...

> While I personally agree, I don't think this is a choice anyone can impose 
> on the people who have to maintain the individual boost libraries.

We have to say something on

http://www.boost.org/development/bugs.html

and the something that we currently say is inadequate.

Regardless of one's personal preference regarding Github issues, I think 
that we all ought to agree that Github pull requests are infinitely better 
than Trac patches (were much better even without CI, now it's not even a 
contest).

And yet people who are willing to submit a patch are encouraged to do so on 
Trac. This wastes either theirs or the maintainer's time.

With respect to reports not containing a patch, I also consider Github 
issues much superior, due to their integration with everything else on 
Github - you can cross-reference issues, PRs, commits, and @ people.