On 2017-12-18, Kai Wetlesen <kwetle...@mac.com> wrote: > There are many decisions that would need to be made that will piss > somebody off. Decisions like what software/platform to use, where to > host the thing, and how much the tool should integrate into existing bug > reporting mechanisms (right now just fancy emailing).
The important part is the data itself. Pretty much everyone who has been making suggestions about a bug tracking system has been talking about things like choice of software, hosting, setting it up. That's not really important. As long as the database can be exported if necessary, the actual choice of platform doesn't matter much. By far the largest amount of work involved is in triage and follow-up of tickets, things like turning "After upgrading from 6.0-stable to 6.2-stable (syspatch) existing setup started to hang" into something meaningful, requesting more information, closing tickets when they're fixed, etc. So the best choice of tracking system is whatever is acceptable to whoever is doing that work. IMHO if anything is going to happen with this it's going to come from someone who just gets on and does it. Maybe someone who just throws a spreadsheet or something together to keep track of tech@/bugs@ mails. I'd be very surprised if a useful system comes from someone who is looking at it as a technical exercise of setting up the system.
