[mapserver-dev] Github Issue Tracker

[Daniel Morissette]

Belated +1 on option #2

Daniel

On 12-05-12 8:45 AM, thomas bonfort wrote:
> I have enabled the issue tracker on tinyows. I'm open to activating
> the one on docs if folks want it that way, I however think that it is
> simpler to keep documentation bugs inside the main mapserver/mapserver
> tracker as many doc tickets spark off from a mapserver ticket.
>
> regards,
> thomas
>
> On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 12:22 PM, Umberto Nicoletti
> <umberto.nicoletti at gmail.com>  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>
>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> mapserver-dev mailing list
>> mapserver-dev at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-dev
>>
> _______________________________________________
> mapserver-dev mailing list
> mapserver-dev at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-dev


-- 
Daniel Morissette
http://www.mapgears.com/
Provider of Professional MapServer Support since 2000