On Mon, Oct 25, 1999 at 03:08:20AM +0100, Tony Finch wrote:
> Debian's system (unlike GNATS) doesn't keep a historical record of the
> bugs that have been resolved, which is a shame. Perhaps this is just
> the way they have set it up.
This is how it used to be. The Debian BTS does keep historica
Hannah Schroeter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Tue, Sep 14, 1999 at 03:55:39AM -0700, Simon Marlow wrote:
>
>> I'm leaning towards Debian at the moment, since it seems about the right
>> level of complexity for the number of bugs we expect to maintain on it (i.e.
>> not many :-).
>
>Seems good. G
Hello!
On Tue, Sep 14, 1999 at 03:55:39AM -0700, Simon Marlow wrote:
> [...]
> - BugZilla (the Mozilla bug tracker). Web/CGI based,
> uses an SQL database. Does just about everything
> under the sun, probably a bit heavyweight for us.
> Does anyone have any experience wi
Simon Marlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote,
> We at GHC HQ are considering getting a bug tracking system of some
> description. There are three free ones I know about:
[...]
> Does anyone have any experience with any of these, or thoughts in general?
> I'm leaning towards Debian at the moment, since
On Tue, Sep 14, 1999 at 03:55:39AM -0700, Simon Marlow wrote:
> - Debian bug tracker. Email based again. lots of
> projects using it, therefore probably lots of
> support. Needs its own virtual domain.
As a Debian developer I can probably answer any qustions you might have
GHCers,
We at GHC HQ are considering getting a bug tracking system of some
description. There are three free ones I know about:
- GNATS. Primarily email based, a bit awkward to use
- Debian bug tracker. Email based again. lots of
projects using it, therefore probabl
