bug database was: [PATCH] status update of loop

bug database was: [PATCH] status update of loop

[jw schultz]

On Tue, Sep 16, 2003 at 12:31:59AM +0200, Fruhwirth Clemens wrote:
> ... and Linux is still to[sic] immature to have a central bugtracking
> database (one which is regularly checked by developers), > ...

The status of a central bug tracking database is not a
measure of Linux's maturity.  It is a measure of the
(perceived) maturity of acceptable bug tracking databases.

There are two ways to have developers use a bug-tracking
system.  Have an authority with power over them compel
them or make the database so useful to them that they have
to be fools not to use it.  Since unlike proprietary
development there is no such authority we will have to wait
until a database becomes sufficiently useful.

Sorry, but i get tired of people claiming Linux (or some
other project) isn't sufficiently mature because one aspect
didn't work as they would have liked.

-- 
________________________________________________________________
	J.W. Schultz            Pegasystems Technologies
	email address:		jw@pegasys.ws

		Remember Cernan and Schmitt

Re: bug database was: [PATCH] status update of loop

[John Bradford]

> > ... and Linux is still to[sic] immature to have a central bugtracking
> > database (one which is regularly checked by developers), > ...

Wrong.

I spent months developing a Kernel Bug Database, specifically for
Linux kernel development.

> The status of a central bug tracking database is not a
> measure of Linux's maturity.  It is a measure of the
> (perceived) maturity of acceptable bug tracking databases.

My Kernel Bug Database implemented things like searching for bugs
based on comparing entries in uploaded .config files, separation of
bug reports and confirmed bugs, archiving of old bug reports, and
categorisation of bug reports based on the MAINTAINERS file.

I'm sure there was desired functionality missing from it, but I never
got much response from my requests for a 'wish-list' of features.

> There are two ways to have developers use a bug-tracking
> system.  Have an authority with power over them compel
> them or make the database so useful to them that they have
> to be fools not to use it.

I don't honestly think we need a bug database.  The mailing list works
well enough.

I'm not actively working on my kernel bug database anymore.

John.