Re: Official bug tracker?

Martin Aspeli wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 19:41:33 -0000, Stefan H. Holek 
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>> +1
>>
>> I don't see anyone but us using the stuff anyway ;-)
> 
> +1
> 
> I've long since stopped telling people that AT is a part of the Plone 
> stack as opposed to a part of Plone :)
> 
> I guess it comes down to project politics. If there are people who would 
> potentially want to file or fix AT bugs that are also not interested in 
> filing/fixing AT bugs, then it deserves its own instance.
> 
> If it does not, we need to ensure that there are simple ways in Trac to 
> distinguish which are AT bugs, though, because there may be a somewhat 
> different set of people fixing AT bugs than Plone bugs.

Yes, but Hanno makes a good point about different release schedules.

Trac really makes milestone planning into a central part of the way it 
manages tickets.  IMO, this is a place that can really give us value if 
we embrace it.

Thus, for those voting +1 on the consolidation, would you also agree 
that Archetypes' release schedule should be tied to Plone's?

Also, the meme above also kinda admits the obvious: that Archetypes 
isn't really standalone, that it is part of the Plone stack.

--Paul



-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files
for problems?  Stop!  Download the new AJAX search engine that makes
searching your log files as easy as surfing the  web.  DOWNLOAD SPLUNK!
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=103432&bid=230486&dat=121642