On Mon, Mar 31, 2003 at 06:34:54PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote: > On Mon, Mar 31, 2003 at 11:05:05AM -0600, Drew Scott Daniels wrote: > > I see it was mentioned that cvs.debian.org will likely be (or maybe > > technically already has been) depreciated in favor of Alioth. I wonder if > > this is the case with the debian BTS? > > Not to my knowledge, and I think it would be a bad idea. I agree that > the SourceForge-style one should probably be disabled. Actually, I can see some uses for it: 1) Unless I'm mistaken, not everything on Alioth is required to be in a Debian package? (Granted, probably 99% of it will be, but some of it may, in fact, be too experimental to put even into experimental, yet, or may not be suitable to packaging, but still be valuble to Debian). 2) You can't do things like "assign bug <X> to the task list for developer <Y>" - so, unless/until the BTS does support this (which, as I believe has been noted before, would require 'accounts', for one thing), there *is* value to it for any multi-maintainer project that wants to try to coordinate bug resolution like this. For bonus points, option #2 might be even more useful with some way to hook the BTS to Alioth for a specific package (similar to, oh, how the PTS currently lets you subscribe) such that certain bug changes in the BTS could be automagically reflected in the Alioth bug list. I do agree that Alioth might should have a big 'this is not the primary place to report most bugs' slapped across it somewhere. Or even disallow public bugfiling on it, and limit it only to folks with accounts. -- Joel Baker <fenton@debian.org>
Attachment:
pgpcAVlahiVVB.pgp
Description: PGP signature