Re: Why Emacs needs a modern bug tracker

[Óscar Fuentes]

Miles Bader <address@hidden> writes:

> Sure, but I think the point is:  we pick what works best for us and our
> users, not what satisfies buzzword-completeness.  We surely should
> reject change, if it's for the worse!  [Maybe that sounds obvious, but
> contemporary corporate culture often does not follow that rule...]
>
> I've used low-quality web bug-trackers (e.g. the one on savannah), and
> IMHO, they're no improvement over the status quo -- they have some
> advantages, but the disadvantages are also severe.

You are right on some aspect: so far there was too much insistence on
how old-fashioned Emacs' development is and how cool modern practices
are. Of course, this approach is wrong. We, the advocates of change,
should provide more evidence supporting our proposals. It was a good
thing seeing how RMS changed his mind as soon as someone demonstrated
how a DVCS would enhance his actual way of working.

For the bug tracker, I'm afraid it will not so easy. Most likely,
current Emacs developers should trade some diary personal incovenience
for some long-term project development efficiency. On the other hand, it
is difficult to appreciate the convenience of having an audit of a bug
or feature until you are using the system for some months.

Finally, please remember that nobody is suggesting "one true way" to
project management. IMHO ESR's proposal is too radical. I'm convinced
that there is no need to completely depart from current practices and we
can settle a point where Emacs development is improved and becomes more
attractive for prospecting developers without turning it boring for the
current ones.

It's just a matter of constructive dialogue.

-- 
Oscar