[visit-developers] GForge bug tracking

Mark Miller miller86 at llnl.gov
Wed May 6 12:35:24 EDT 2009

Hello All,

I'd like to second Cyrus' suggestion here. That is IF we wind up going
with svn.nersc.gov, then the only missing piece at that point is a bug
tracker and there is no reason to remain committed to GForge for that
reason alone. At the same time, I have no experience with anything other
than ClearQuest really. So, I am hoping that the knowledgeable folks
take up this discussion, re-evaluate and recommend a final decision on
the tracker. I see that Tom has suggested a few other options and I've
heard Cyrus mention some as well. I am sure Sean and Jeremy have
suggestions here too. And, again, this is all contingent on the outcome
that we are staying with svn.nersc.gov. That decision I think is still
up in the air pending information forthcoming from outreach center.


On Tue, 2009-05-05 at 11:40 -0700, Cyrus D. Harrison wrote:
> This is kind of the path I was heading down when I asked if we are 
> losing anything by having the repo disconnected from our bug tracker.
> To me - the lure of gForge was a one stop shop where we can manage 
> VisIt: our source code repo, project members, tickets, etc.
> But it seems like a jack of all trades - master of none.
> If we have to stick with svn.nersc.gov & we are *only* using it for bug 
> tracking I think we need to reevaluate the merit of our original 
> assumptions & goals.
> We already have an independent wiki solution (which has proved very 
> successful & useful) and over the last two years many great new project 
> management (or just bug tracking) solutions have popped up.
> Sorry if I just dumped the can of worms (which Mark admitted to opening 
> :-) ) on everyones' lap, but I think it deserves a second look.
> -Cyrus
> Mark Miller wrote:
> > On Tue, 2009-05-05 at 12:05 -0600, tom fogal wrote:
> >   
> >> I'm not sure this is generally true.
> >>
> >> I haven't used ClearQuest before, but I would be surprised if you
> >> considered say, launchpad, to be a huge step down.  That type of
> >> system does an amazingly good job of organizing distributed software
> >> development.  Actually, I'd be floored if ClearQuest did as good a job
> >> at such a task.
> >>
> >> Even just compared to bugzilla or manta or whatnot though, I'd say
> >> GForge's tracker is ages behind other systems.  I'd say that about
> >> subversion too though, and people seem to like that ;P
> >>     
> >
> > So, I haven't read your Wiki refs yet. And, I'm sure I am opening an old
> > can of worms. But, why did we decide to got with GForge if there are
> > these other 'better' options ;)?
> >
> >   
> >>> Also, I happened notice that we have 3 trackers; tech support,
> >>> Feature Requests, Bugs. What is the rationale for having different
> >>> trackers? If we keep Bug and Feature Request trackers separate,
> >>> then I think we need NOT have 'enhancement' as a 'flag' on a Bug
> >>> submission.
> >>>       
> >> I certainly don't see the case for having 3 trackers *and* the flag in
> >> our `Bug' db.
> >>
> >> Those are trackers are removable, IIRC.  Which would we prefer
> >> (deleting trackers or the flag)?
> >>     
> >
> > I'd favor deleting trackers.
> >
> > Mark
> >
> >
> >   
> >> -tom
> >>     
Mark C. Miller, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
email: mailto:miller86 at llnl.gov
(M/T/W) (925)-423-5901 (!!LLNL BUSINESS ONLY!!)
(Th/F)  (530)-753-8511 (!!LLNL BUSINESS ONLY!!)

More information about the visit-developers mailing list