[QGIS-Developer] Last call for switching to github issue tracker

[Matthias]

> On 14 January 2018 at 23:19, Paolo Cavallini  wrote:   
>  > Hi all,   
>  >   
>  > Il 14/01/2018 12:11, Richard Duivenvoorde ha scritto:   
>  >> On 14-01-18 00:17, Tim Sutton wrote:   
>  >   
>  >>> Actually this is not true (correct me if I am wrong PSC): the PSC was   
>  >>> against two things:   
>  >>>   
>  >>> 1) losing all history in issue manager. I think this is reasonable since   
>  >>> there is a lot of very useful history in the issue tracker and it was   
>  >>> felt that a 'clean slate start ‘ would be a disservice to all those who   
>  >>> have raised issues in the past.   
>  >>> 2) calling for a migration without a fully tested, fully fleshed out   
>  >>> plan to manage the migration from start to finish. This means someone   
>  >>> taking responsibility for the *whole* process which so far hasn’t been   
>  >>> forthcoming.   
>  >>   
>  >> That is exactly what it was in my memory too.   
>  >   
>  > I can confirm. I Still believe loosing all our history of open and   
>  > closed issues would be a serious damage to the project.   
>   
>  I agree. I'd find this a very very sore loss. Personally, I'm   
>  referring to historic issues almost on a daily basis, both for   
>  checking what closed issues actually were and also checking for open   
>  issues before working on an area of code.
  
Nothing that couldn't be fixed, see [https://github.com/m-kuhn/QGIS-Test/issues](https://github.com/m-kuhn/QGIS-Test/issues) .  
  
The only real limitation (on the technological side) is that we'll not be able to preserve comments as such under the original user account. Noneteless, attribution can be preserved (by adding @name references next to comment quotes).  
  
Matthias  
  
  
  

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-developer/attachments/20180115/a1f78dc2/attachment.html>