[mapserver-dev] Github Issue Tracker

Umberto Nicoletti umberto.nicoletti at gmail.com
Sat May 12 06:22:32 EDT 2012

I'm for #2 as it fits more naturally in the github scheme. Github is a
great gateway to attracting developers and imho there is no point in
adopting conventions that steer us away from its workflow.


On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 2:34 PM, Alan Boudreault
<aboudreault at mapgears.com>wrote:

> Hi devs,
> An discussion raised up this morning on IRC. I was checking some issues
> and noticed that the github project mapserver/tinyows hadn't the issue
> tracker enabled, though mapserver/mapcache had one.
> We would need to clarify this for us and users and be consistent. Where
> should I create a ticket for tinyows, mapcache and even doc? There are two
> options:
> 1: All issues are created in the github project mapserver/mapserver and
> committed in their appropriate github repo. This implies to set the LABEL
> to the appropriate component of the issue. This is similar to the way we
> worked with SVN (and selecting the component). This regroups everything at
> the same place, which is a good think. However, if we create an issue
> related to tinyows and commit a patch in the repo, it is not as
> straightforward to reference that commit or ticket. To get the automatic
> referencing in the ticket:
>  - we need to commit with: git commit -m "bla bla bla
> mapserver/mapserver#1234"
>  - in a ticket, we can refenrence a commit with: "this is a comment1
> mapserver/tinyowns at 1234567"
> There is proabably other referencing issues... ie... attaching a pull
> request with a ticket.
> 2: All issues are created in their own github project and committed
> normally. This is (IMO) more easy and straightforward for users and devs as
> well.
>  - commits are as we did in the pass, a simple #1234 , and @123456 to
> reference a changeset.
>  - It is more easy to see ALL issues related to the specific project,
> since even if the label is missing, it has been created as the right place.
>  - Also, the concept of *label* in github seems different than a trac
> component. I don't think we can specify a *owner* for a label. Correct me
> if I am wrong Thomas. At least, creating issues in MapCache/TinyOWS/Docs
> would clearly set the component to the project owner.
> As Thomas mentionned, both solutions have their strengths and weaknesses.
> What do you think?
> Alan
> --
> Alan Boudreault
> http://www.mapgears.com/
> ______________________________**_________________
> mapserver-dev mailing list
> mapserver-dev at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/**mailman/listinfo/mapserver-dev<http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-dev>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/mapserver-dev/attachments/20120512/c6702940/attachment.html

More information about the mapserver-dev mailing list