[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Fredrik you need tools to help you track the bugs and their status, but
Fredrik you can handle issue registration, discussion, and most
Fredrik maintenance stuff using good old mail just fine.
Which is something SourceForge has yet to learn. At work we
Paul Rubin wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Which is something SourceForge has yet to learn. At work we use a system
called RT (http://www.bestpractical.com/rt/). While it's not perfect, it
does allow submissions and responses via email. That feature alone puts it
miles ahead of SF in my
Michael Ströder [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
E-mail spam is an issue but the python.org infrastructure already has to
do spam filtering for mailing lists. Or does it simply resend all mail?
The problem is that the lists (or at least the pypy list) got mirrored
somewhere without having the
Fredrik Lundh wrote:
you're not on the infrastructure list, I hear.
I tried to figure out where that list is, so I could have
a look at the archives, but I didn't find it in the (for
me) obvious places. Could someone please provide a link
to the archives for this mailing list, or aren't there
Magnus Lycka wrote:
Fredrik Lundh wrote:
you're not on the infrastructure list, I hear.
I tried to figure out where that list is, so I could have
a look at the archives, but I didn't find it in the (for
me) obvious places. Could someone please provide a link
to the archives for this
Michael E-mail spam is an issue but the python.org infrastructure
Michael already has to do spam filtering for mailing lists. Or does it
Michael simply resend all mail?
Email sent to most mailing lists hosted on mail.python.org are passed
through a SpamBayes instance before being
Magnus Lycka wrote:
It seems to me that an obvious advantage with either Roundup
or Trac, is that if the Python project used it, the Python
project would have a significant impact on how this product
developed. Even if the Jira people seem eager to please us,
I'm pretty convinced that it
On 9 Oct 2006 06:36:30 -0700,
Paul Boddie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
... Meanwhile, despite the python.org codebase presumably running
various commercial sites, ...
Nothing should have given you this impression! python.org's
formatting is handled through a custom script called Pyramid,
A.M. Kuchling wrote:
On 9 Oct 2006 06:36:30 -0700,
Paul Boddie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
... Meanwhile, despite the python.org codebase presumably running
various commercial sites, ...
Nothing should have given you this impression! python.org's
formatting is handled through a custom
Paul Boddie [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Indeed, as someone who merely browses python-dev, perhaps I
shouldn't care how the core developers track their bugs: if they
struggle to manage that information in future, why should I care?
Well, the reason I should care is related to the reason why the
Magnus Lycka [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Fredrik Lundh wrote:
python.org could still need a few more roundup volunteers, but
it's not like nobody's prepared to contribute manhours. don't
underestimate the community.
So, how many have offered to help? Is this information available in
some
Ben Finney wrote:
Ilias Lazaridis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
As for Mr. Holden... it's not a matter of not respecting you.
It is in his nature to babble in this way.
Sometimes it's even funny!
Oh my. You have *seriously* misjudged this group if you think that
comment will give you any
Giovanni Bajo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
tracker. I was claiming that, if such a group was ever formed, it was
better
spent on bug triage rather than keeping their keys ready all day long to
quick-fix any server breakage in minutes.
This could be made into an
Giovanni Bajo schrieb:
So, you might prefer 6-10 people to activate a new tracker account
faster than light. I'd rather have 3-days delay in administrative
issues because our single administrator is sleeping or whatever, and
then have 2-3 people doing regular bug processing.
Are you ever
Paul Boddie schrieb:
When SF is down, people sometimes send tracker items to
the pydev list instead, when means someone else (who?) has to put in the
tracker or it gets lost.
According to Harald Armin Massa's PostgreSQL talk at EuroPython, the
PostgreSQL people manage all their bugs via
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
From my experience with GCC, I can only report that this is definitely
not working. There used to be a mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED], and
reports got either answered immediately, or not at all. People who
thought they were responsible put the mails in some folder, and
Fredrik you need tools to help you track the bugs and their status, but
Fredrik you can handle issue registration, discussion, and most
Fredrik maintenance stuff using good old mail just fine.
Which is something SourceForge has yet to learn. At work we use a system
called RT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Which is something SourceForge has yet to learn. At work we use a system
called RT (http://www.bestpractical.com/rt/). While it's not perfect, it
does allow submissions and responses via email. That feature alone puts it
miles ahead of SF in my mind.
I'm on the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Giovanni Are bug-tracker configuration issues so critical that
having Giovanni to wait 48-72hrs to have them fixed is
absolutely unacceptable Giovanni for Python development?
Yes, I think that would put a crimp in things. The downtimes we see
for the
Giovanni Bajo wrote:
[...]
I understand your concerns, but I have to remember you that most bug reports
submitted by users go totally ignored for several years, or, better, forever.
I
do not have a correct statistic for this, but I'm confident that at least 80%
of the RFE or patches filed
Giovanni Bajo wrote:
Paul Rubin wrote:
You fail to recognize that Python is *already* using a non-free
software for bug tracking, as do thousands of other projects.
I don't think that reflects an explicit decision. SF started out as
free software and the software became nonfree after
Steve Holden wrote:
snip
Perhaps what I *should* have written was Sadly *many* people spend too
much time bitching and moaning about those that roll their sleeves up,
and not enough rolling their own sleeves up and pitching in.
Sniping from the sidelines is far easier than hard work towards
Giovanni Bajo wrote:
snip
You might also be understimating how negative could be the reaction from the
open-source community to such a move.
--
Giovanni Bajo
That is simply rediculous. Step away from the kool-aid.
Robert
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Steve Holden wrote:
Giovanni Bajo wrote:
[...]
I understand your concerns, but I have to remember you that most bug
reports
submitted by users go totally ignored for several years, or, better,
forever. I
do not have a correct statistic for this, but I'm confident that at
least 80%
of
Steve Holden wrote:
I understand your concerns, but I have to remember you that most bug
reports submitted by users go totally ignored for several years, or,
better, forever. I do not have a correct statistic for this, but I'm
confident that at least 80% of the RFE or patches filed every week
[Giovanni Bajo]
I understand your concerns, but I have to remember you that most bug reports
submitted by users go totally ignored for several years, or, better, forever.
I
do not have a correct statistic for this,
Indeed you do not.
but I'm confident that at least 80% of the RFE or
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Giovanni Bajo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Are you ever going to try and make a point which is not you are not
entitled to have opinions because you do not act? Your sarcasm is
getting annoying. And since I'm not trolling nor flaming, I think I
deserve a little bit more
Aahz wrote:
Are you ever going to try and make a point which is not you are not
entitled to have opinions because you do not act? Your sarcasm is
getting annoying. And since I'm not trolling nor flaming, I think I
deserve a little bit more of respect.
IMO, regardless of whether you are
Tim Peters wrote:
None are /totally ignored/ -- indeed, at least I see every one as it
comes in. You might want to change your claim to that no work
obviously visible to you is done on them. That would be better.
Please notice that my mail was in the context of user satisfaction with the
Giovanni And, in turn, this was in the context of hiring 6-10 people as
Giovanni the only acceptable minimum to maintain and admin a bug
Giovanni tracker.
Who said anything about hiring? I don't believe anyone expects any of the
6-10 people to work full-time (well, except for you it
Giovanni Bajo wrote:
Aahz wrote:
Are you ever going to try and make a point which is not you are not
entitled to have opinions because you do not act? Your sarcasm is
getting annoying. And since I'm not trolling nor flaming, I think I
deserve a little bit more of respect.
IMO,
Ilias Lazaridis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
As for Mr. Holden... it's not a matter of not respecting you.
It is in his nature to babble in this way.
Sometimes it's even funny!
Oh my. You have *seriously* misjudged this group if you think that
comment will give you any net gain in discussions
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Giovanni Bajo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Aahz wrote:
Giovanni removed his own attribution:
Are you ever going to try and make a point which is not you are not
entitled to have opinions because you do not act? Your sarcasm is
getting annoying. And since I'm not
Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
You need just 2 active contributors - and the python community, not
more
Hmm, this number does not say much. It really depends on the required
service level and how much time these two people can spend for
maintaining the tracker service.
Ciao, Michael.
--
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
That, in principle, could happen to any other free software as well.
What is critical here is that SF *hosted* the installation. If we
would use a tracker that is free software, yet hosted it elsewhere,
the same thing could happen: the hoster could make modifications to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Martin The regular admin tasks likely include stuff like this:
Martin - the system is unavailable, bring it back to work
Martin This is really the worst case, and a short response time
Martin is the major factor in how users perceive the service
Giovanni Bajo [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Are bug-tracker configuration issues so critical that having to wait
48-72hrs to have them fixed is absolutely unacceptable for Python
development? It looks like an overexaggeration. People easily cope
with 2-3 days of SVN freezing, when they are
Ian Bicking wrote:
It handles some other kinds of repositories now (bzr, I think?). From
what I understand fully abstracting out the repository format seems to
still be a work in progress, but it is in progress and you can write
repository plugins right now.
That covers Trac, but other
Paul Rubin schrieb:
How often should a tracker freeze anyway? People with no technical
knowledge at all run BBS systems that almost never freeze. Is a
tracker somehow more failure-prone? It's just a special purpose BBS,
I'd have thought.
For whatever reason, the SF bug tracker is often
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
For whatever reason, the SF bug tracker is often down, or not
responding. I'm uncertain why that is, but it's a matter of
fact that this was one of the driving forces in moving away
from SF (so it is a real problem).
As I asked before, did anyone look into asking
Paul Boddie schrieb:
As I asked before, did anyone look into asking large-scale users of the
various considered products about their experiences with regard to
reliability, scalability, and so on?
I didn't ask anyone, primarily because of lack of time.
Regards,
Martin
--
Paul How often should a tracker freeze anyway? People with no
Paul technical knowledge at all run BBS systems that almost never
Paul freeze. Is a tracker somehow more failure-prone? It's just a
Paul special purpose BBS, I'd have thought.
And when those BBS systems get hacked
Giovanni Bajo wrote:
I am seriously concerned
that the PSF infrastructure committee EVER considered non open-source
applications for this. In fact, I thought that was an implicit requirement in
the selection.
The goal of the selection process is to support the work of the Python
developers
Giovanni Bajo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Are bug-tracker configuration issues so critical that having to wait
48-72hrs
to have them fixed is absolutely unacceptable for Python development? It
looks
like an overexaggeration. People
Terry Reedy wrote:
When SF is down, people sometimes send tracker items to
the pydev list instead, when means someone else (who?) has to put in the
tracker or it gets lost.
According to Harald Armin Massa's PostgreSQL talk at EuroPython, the
PostgreSQL people manage all their bugs via mailing
Michael Ströder wrote:
Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
You need just 2 active contributors - and the python community, not
more
Hmm, this number does not say much. It really depends on the required
service level and how much time these two people can spend for
maintaining the tracker service.
Jira is a remarkably well done product. We've adopted it internally and
use it for project planning (we're doing Agile) as well as defect
tracking. The plugin support and user interface just can't be touched
by the competition and I've been looking. I'd prefer an open source
python based system
Ben Finney wrote:
David Goodger [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Look at the results again. Jira and RoundUp tied for functionality,
but Jira has a hosting/admin offer behind it. That's huge. But
rather than declaring Jira the outright winner, which they could
have done, the committee has allowed
Steve Holden wrote:
You appear to be prepared to go to any length short of providing effort
to support the open source tracker.
http://www.userland.com/whatIsStopEnergy
/F
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Terry Reedy wrote:
Ben Finney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
The whole point of moving *from* SF *to* another bug tracker is to
improve the situation, surely.
The current situation is that the limitations and intermittant failures of
the SF tracker
Fredrik Lundh wrote:
Steve Holden wrote:
you're not on the infrastructure list, I hear. python.org could still need a
few more roundup volunteers, but it's not like nobody's prepared to con-
tribute manhours. don't underestimate the community.
No, I'm not on the infrastructure list, but I
Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
Giovanni Bajo wrote:
Hello,
I just read this mail by Brett Cannon:
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-October/069139.html
where the PSF infrastracture committee, after weeks of evaluation,
recommends
using a non open source tracker (called JIRA - never
Steve Holden wrote:
Excellent. I've just complained elsewhere in this thread that those
dissenting didn't appear to want to rectify the situation by offering
their time. It would be nice to be wrong about that.
the dissenting won't contribute a thing, of course. they never ever do.
but
Steve Holden [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
And I'd prefer it if you'd drop this subject. So, if you have
nothing new to say, kindly leave it.
I'm happy to, but:
You appear to be prepared to go to any length short of providing
effort to support the open source tracker.
This was addressed in a
[Ben Finney]
I don't see why you're being so obtuse
[Terry Reedy]
I think name calling is out of line here.
Name calling is always out of line on comp.lang.python. Unless it's
done by Guido. Then it's OK. Anyone else, just remind them that even
Hitler had better manners. That always calms
Ben Finney wrote:
Steve Holden [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
And I'd prefer it if you'd drop this subject. So, if you have
nothing new to say, kindly leave it.
I'm happy to, but:
You appear to be prepared to go to any length short of providing
effort to support the open source tracker.
Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
Giovanni Bajo wrote:
Hello,
I just read this mail by Brett Cannon:
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-October/069139.html
where the PSF infrastracture committee, after weeks of evaluation,
recommends
using a non open source tracker (called JIRA - never
Georg Brandl wrote:
The python foundation suggests a non-python non-open-source bugtracking
tool for python.
Actually, it suggests two bugtracking tools, one of them written in
Python.
the announcemant's subject line said recommendation for a new issue
tracker, though; not we need the
Fredrik Lundh wrote:
Georg Brandl wrote:
The python foundation suggests a non-python non-open-source bugtracking
tool for python.
Actually, it suggests two bugtracking tools, one of them written in
Python.
the announcemant's subject line said recommendation for a new issue
tracker,
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
In fact, are you absolutely positive that you need so much effort to
maintain an existing bugtracker installation? I know for sure that
GCC's Bugzilla installation is pretty much on its own; Daniel Berlin
does some maintainance every once in a while (upgrading when new
Ben This thread was started on the shock of realising that a non-free
Ben tool was even being *considered* for the new Python bug
Ben tracker. Those are the terms on which I've been arguing.
Of course, the candidate trackers have been known for months. Messages have
been posted to
Giovanni Bajo wrote:
Martin, I am by no means understimating Daniel's work. I am just noting that
the spare-time work he did is, by definition, much much lower than the 6-10
people that the PSF infrastructure committee is calling for. I would like
this
statement to be officially reduced to
Michael Ströder wrote:
Glancing over this thread I wonder what these people are supposed to do.
Any list of requirements available?
from the original announcement (linked from the first post in this thread):
In order for Roundup to be considered equivalent in terms of an
overall tracker
Michael Ströder schrieb:
Martin, I am by no means understimating Daniel's work. I am just noting that
the spare-time work he did is, by definition, much much lower than the 6-10
people that the PSF infrastructure committee is calling for. I would like
this
statement to be officially reduced
Steve Holden wrote:
Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
Giovanni Bajo wrote:
Hello,
I just read this mail by Brett Cannon:
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-October/069139.html
where the PSF infrastracture committee, after weeks of evaluation,
recommends
using a non open source
Martin The regular admin tasks likely include stuff like this:
Martin - the system is unavailable, bring it back to work
Martin This is really the worst case, and a short response time
Martin is the major factor in how users perceive the service
Martin - the system is
Paul Boddie wrote:
Perhaps, although I imagine that Trac would have a lot more uptake if
it handled more than just Subversion repositories.
It handles some other kinds of repositories now (bzr, I think?). From
what I understand fully abstracting out the repository format seems to
still be a
Paul Rubin schrieb:
Martin v. Löwis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It is a fork of an old version. Existence of this version hasn't helped
a bit when we tried to get our data out of sf.net.
Yeah, I'd guessed it might be a fork. Is there stuff in sf.net that a
web robot can't retrieve?
We ended
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
I hope this
recommendation from the PSF infrastructure committee is rejected.
That is very very unlikely. Who would reject it, and why?
The community, and I am impressed you do not want to understand the why. It
is an extremely bad picture for an open source flag like
Fredrik Lundh wrote:
that's just not true. lots of people have voiced concerns over using
closed-sourced stuff originally designed for enterprise-level Java
users for an application domain where Python has several widely used
agile alternatives to chose from.
Frankly, I don't give a damn
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Giovanni Bajo wrote:
Does this smell Bitkeeper fiasco to anyone else than me?
I can't understand why people waste time arguing this stuff.
Use whatever tool is best at it's job... if it's not written in Python
it doesn't mean that Python is not good for the task,
A.M. Kuchling wrote:
... using a non open source tracker (called JIRA - never heard
before of course) for Python itself.
Other projects do use it; see
http://wiki.apache.org/general/ApacheJira for a partial list, and a
link to the Apache Software Foundation's issue trackers.
which, in my
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
It's significantly different from the Bitkeeper fiasco in two
important
ways:
1. Bitkeeper is a source revisioning system, so it is similar to CVS
and Subversion. This project here is just the bug tracker, which
is of lesser importance. If we move to a
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And i dunno what the case against Trac is (it looks a fine tool for my
small projects) but probably it's not good enough for python.org
Trac is really good in my experience.
http://trac.edgewall.org/
Python.org has already moved to svn so trac is
Nick Craig-Wood wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And i dunno what the case against Trac is (it looks a fine tool for my
small projects) but probably it's not good enough for python.org
Trac is really good in my experience.
Trac was considered.
A nice extra is that it
On 10/4/06, Richard Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nick Craig-Wood wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And i dunno what the case against Trac is (it looks a fine tool for my
small projects) but probably it's not good enough for python.org
Trac is really good in my
Giovanni Bajo wrote:
A.M. Kuchling wrote:
... using a non open source tracker (called JIRA - never heard
before of course) for Python itself.
Other projects do use it; see
http://wiki.apache.org/general/ApacheJira for a partial list, and a
link to the Apache Software Foundation's issue
Richard Jones wrote:
Nick Craig-Wood wrote:
Trac is really good in my experience.
Trac was considered.
A nice extra is that it is written in python.
So are Roundup and Launchpad, two of the other three trackers considered.
It should be noted that most skepticism (that I'm aware of)
Steve Holden wrote:
But sadly people are much happier complaining on c.l.py than exerting
themselves to support the community with an open source issue tracker.
you're not on the infrastructure list, I hear. python.org could still need a
few more roundup volunteers, but it's not like nobody's
On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 07:37:47 GMT,
Giovanni Bajo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am seriously concerned
that the PSF infrastructure committee EVER considered non open-source
applications for this. In fact, I thought that was an implicit requirement in
the selection.
Being open source
A.M. Kuchling wrote:
I am seriously concerned
that the PSF infrastructure committee EVER considered non open-source
applications for this. In fact, I thought that was an implicit
requirement in the selection.
Being open source wasn't a requirement;
which is, indeed, shocking and amazing.
Giovanni Bajo wrote:
In fact, are you absolutely positive that you need so much effort to
maintain an existing bugtracker installation?
I wonder what kinds of insights were sought from other open source
projects. It's not as if there aren't any big open source projects
having approachable
Fredrik Lundh wrote:
Steve Holden wrote:
But sadly people are much happier complaining on c.l.py than exerting
themselves to support the community with an open source issue tracker.
you're not on the infrastructure list, I hear. python.org could still need a
few more roundup
Terry Reedy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As I understood B.C.'s announcement, that was one of the judging criteria,
and the plan is for PSF to get a daily backup dump of the data.
This had nothing to do with the choice of not using Trac or Launchpad.
Quoting Brett Cannon from the original mail:
Steve Holden [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Sniping from the sidelines is far easier than hard work towards a goal.
Right now there is not even agreement on what the goal is. The
surprise people are expressing is because they thought one of the
goals of a big open source project would be to avoid
Fredrik Lundh [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Steve Holden wrote:
But sadly people are much happier complaining on c.l.py than exerting
themselves to support the community with an open source issue tracker.
you're not on the infrastructure list, I hear. python.org could still need a
few
Paul Boddie wrote:
Giovanni Bajo wrote:
In fact, are you absolutely positive that you need so much effort to
maintain an existing bugtracker installation?
I wonder what kinds of insights were sought from other open source
projects. It's not as if there aren't any big open source projects
Valentino Volonghi aka Dialtone wrote:
Terry Reedy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As I understood B.C.'s announcement, that was one of the judging criteria,
and the plan is for PSF to get a daily backup dump of the data.
This had nothing to do with the choice of not using Trac or Launchpad.
Steve Holden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So clearly the 'get a daily backup of the data' is not the reason.
Backing up a sqlite database is pretty easy.
Do you have any idea fo the scale of the Python issue (bug) database? Do
you really think SQLite would be a suitable platform for it?
Valentino Volonghi wrote:
Considering that trac can also run on postgres or mysql and also
considering that both of these databases have enough tools to deal with
backups I think it's a non issue.
10k entries shouldn't be much of an issue for sqlite3 either.
(I don't think any of the
Fredrik Lundh wrote:
Valentino Volonghi wrote:
Considering that trac can also run on postgres or mysql and also
considering that both of these databases have enough tools to deal with
backups I think it's a non issue.
10k entries shouldn't be much of an issue for sqlite3 either.
Out of
Giovanni Bajo wrote:
I understand your point. OTOH, exactly because the tracker system is a far
lesser importance, it's amazing there is *ever* a need to evaluate non-FLOSS
solutions, when there are so many good free solutions around. Instead of
I think you are missing the point. Switching to
Giovanni In fact, are you absolutely positive that you need so much
Giovanni effort to maintain an existing bugtracker installation?
The development group's experience with SF and I think to a lesser extent,
Roundup in its early days, and more generally with other components of the
Istvan I think you are missing the point. Switching to a different
Istvan tracker is not such a big deal. Having a really good tracker is
Istvan a big deal.
No, actually switching trackers can be one big pain in the ass. You
probably aren't aware of how hard it's been for the Python
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Giovanni In fact, are you absolutely positive that you need so
much Giovanni effort to maintain an existing bugtracker
installation?
The development group's experience with SF and I think to a lesser
extent, Roundup in its early days, and more generally with
Steve Holden wrote:
No, I'm not on the infrastructure list, but I know that capable people
*are*: and you know I am quite capable of donating my time to the
cause, when I have it to spare (and sometimes even when I don't).
Perhaps what I *should* have written was Sadly *many* people spend
Giovanni Bajo wrote:
Hello,
I just read this mail by Brett Cannon:
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-October/069139.html
where the PSF infrastracture committee, after weeks of evaluation,
recommends
using a non open source tracker (called JIRA - never heard before of
On 04 Oct 2006 06:44:24 -0700,
Paul Rubin wrote:
Right now there is not even agreement on what the goal is.
The goal is a new tracker for python.org that the developers like
better; the original call lists 3 reasons (bad interface; lack of
reliability; lack of workflow controls).
Giovanni Bajo wrote:
The current request is: please, readers of python-dev, setup a team of 6-10
people to handle roundup or we'll go to a non-free software for bug
tracking.
Actually, it would appear that the request goes out to
comp.lang.python/python-list as well (ie. the ungrateful plebs
Giovanni Bajo wrote:
The current request is: please, readers of python-dev, setup a team of 6-10
people to handle roundup or we'll go to a non-free software for bug
tracking. This is something which I cannot cope with, and I'm *speaking*
up against. Were the request lowered to something more
1 - 100 of 157 matches
Mail list logo
