[mapserver-dev] Github Issue Tracker

Alan Boudreault aboudreault at mapgears.com
Sat May 12 09:52:46 EDT 2012

I have the same opinion.

On 05/12/2012 06:22 AM, Umberto Nicoletti wrote:
> 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.
> Umberto
> On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 2:34 PM, Alan Boudreault 
> <aboudreault at mapgears.com <mailto: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 <mailto:mapserver-dev at lists.osgeo.org>
>     http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-dev

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/mapserver-dev/attachments/20120512/3c55cfb3/attachment.html

More information about the mapserver-dev mailing list