Re: Bugs mailing list

till wrote: > On 11/1/07, Joshua Eichorn <josh@bluga.net> wrote: >> Joe Stump wrote: >>>> Didn't mean to start a holy war here guys :-) >>> Not a holy war. I'm just forgetting that Open Source is a bureaucracy >>> as opposed to a business. This is so far outside of the scope of what >>> PEAR's *core competency* is it's amazing it's even being discussed to >>> me. In fact, it's been disallowed that *applications* be created, >>> submitted and distributed via PEAR for some time now (the exception >>> being pearweb; even the PEAR channel code is on a separate channel). >>> >>> What I'm saying is, as a consumer of PEAR, I find it sad that >>> brilliant, core PHP developers are proposing chasing the bug tracker >>> holy grail rather than making me cool ass PHP libraries. As a lazy >>> PEAR developer I'm saying have fun; I'll be sticking to creating more >>> PEAR code for now. >>> >>> With that I'm out. >>> >>> --Joe >>> >> I'll agree with not spending time on a bug tracker, but we already have >> one. And any change is going to be a lot of work, so lets just stick >> with the current one. Anything else we pick will be just as bad (you >> only like tools until you use them). > > Rumour has it that the current one will be replaced anyway? Someone > said Jani and Greg are working on a new one. It could be as simple as > a vote if people want trac. The "new" bugtracker is based on the one in pearweb and is designed to port that code for pecl and PHP bugs so that all 3 databases are combined as one, making it easier to share bug data, and even move a PEAR bug to PHP, or PHP bug to PEAR, etc. It's not as simple as a vote - a LOT of thought has gone into this question by the web infrastructure team. If you'd like a public summary, this can be arranged, but I hope you can understand why it has not been to date - nobody asked :). Greg