bugtracker
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision | ||
| bugtracker [2008/07/03 13:39] – added conclusion klette | bugtracker [2008/07/04 20:09] (current) – Eval of JTrac klette | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 161: | Line 161: | ||
| Not hosting it ourselfs provides to major benefits. First and most important is the fact that we dont have to maintain or do anything | Not hosting it ourselfs provides to major benefits. First and most important is the fact that we dont have to maintain or do anything | ||
| regarding the administration, | regarding the administration, | ||
| + | As another factor in this is the both ways support for emails on launchpad - if we want this in trac, we are going to have to make it ourselfs, taking even more time away from solving the tasks that we are supposed to be solving. | ||
| - | I suggest as of today that we switch from sourceforge.net to launchpad | + | Because of these reasons, |
| + | ===== Bugtrackers not tested, but evaluated ===== | ||
| + | * Google code - Main feature is code-hosting. Bugtracker is not really there yet. | ||
| + | * Flyspray - Has serious performance issues, and code quality is known to be under par. | ||
| + | * Request Tracker - Not really a tool that helps opening the development. Its a behemoth not fitting our needs | ||
| + | * JTrac - Missing key components like email intergration and rpc interface. Has some other issues as well. | ||
bugtracker.1215092351.txt.gz · Last modified: by klette
