Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] Trac
From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-08-01 20:47:33

On 8/1/18 1:03 PM, Marshall Clow via Boost wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 12:54 PM, Robert Ramey <ramey_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> On 8/1/18 10:46 AM, Marshall Clow via Boost wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 8:19 AM, Robert Ramey via Boost <
>>> boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>> Could we agree to stop using the Trac system? The github issues/pr system
>>>> is much more functional. I propose we close the trac system to new
>>>> issues
>>>> - be of course leave it available for reference.
>>>> Robert Ramey
>>>> When we have discussed this in the past, the next question is
>>> Who is going to migrate all the issues from Trac to Github?
>>> And then people look at the sky, whistle, kick the ground, and wander off.
>>> Who is volunteering to do that work?
>> No such work is necessary. The proposal is that they be left available
>> but closed for new issues. This lets us have it both ways. Simple as that.
> So you're fine with having two bug repositories.
> Then why close Trac?

I see 4 alternatives:

a) stay with track and require developers to use trac and only trac
b) require only github issues and convert all the old trac tickets to
c) choose trac for all new issues but leave the old issues in trac so no
one has to convert them

d) let each library developer select which of the above he wants to do.

I'm not adverse to b, c, or d. But the current setup of having two
conflicting working systems is a burden on developers and adds no value.

Robert Ramey

> -- Marshall
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes:

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at