<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
Hi<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 11/10/2015 07:36 PM, Tim Sutton
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:AFBAA77C-0800-4923-BE38-BDB7291E21E8@qgis.org"
type="cite">Hi (hoping this discussion does not take the same
downwards spiral as the chat platform one did)
<div class=""><br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">On 10 Nov 2015, at 15:42,
Giovanni Manghi <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:giovanni.manghi@gmail.com" class="">giovanni.manghi@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:<br class="">
<br class="">
* someone raised the issue about not being possible to
customize<br class="">
tickets (to add a paypal button) but I think that on Sunday
someone<br class="">
made some tests and concluded that this would not be an issue.<br
class="">
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
Yeah, Marco Bernasocchi implemented a service, it seemed to be quiet
easy since he was very quick.<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:AFBAA77C-0800-4923-BE38-BDB7291E21E8@qgis.org"
type="cite">
<div class="">
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Thanks for the nice summary Giovanni. From my
point of view, living in a bandwidth impoverished society
(well compared to EU standards anyway) and dealing often with
people that have much worse bandwidth, our issue tracker is
bordering on unusable. There are too many full page reloads
and the workflows are not suitable for novice users IMHO. I
don’t know how many people I have said to ‘Its FOSS, if you
have a problem, file a ticket’ and then the conversation dies
when we actually show them what is involved. The GH tracker is
really nice because it is fast and ajaxy. It is also much
faster to *use* when you you just want to dive in and make a
quick comment or compose an issue. We use GH issue tracker and
it is really nice in the way it cross references issues, makes
it trivial to insert screenshots into issues and allows you to
easily mark up your text with markdown. So I won’t be sad to
see the back of redmine… big +1 from me on migrating. I played
around with some migration tools and it seems like it will be
possible to migrate the RM tickets fairly comfortably (sans
attachments). I suggest making a small test repo and doing the
issue import against that and see how it goes.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Big +1 for the same reason.<br>
I'd be glad to see somebody show the proof of concept, that would
remove one unknown from the equation.<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:AFBAA77C-0800-4923-BE38-BDB7291E21E8@qgis.org"
type="cite">
<div class="">
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">For attachments what about if we run a small file
drop service (could be a little django app with a file size
limit of 5mb or whatever) and for larger datasets use the same
mechanisms as redline used? It should be fairly trivial to
create something like that of find a FOSS one we can spin up
in a docker container in the server…</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
That would be my second option as well if github itself doesn't
offer the service. We could probably easily integrate it with the
github authentication system?<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
Matthias
<div class="">
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
</div>
<br>
</body>
</html>