Re: track bugs in VCS, not the other way around
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
martin f krafft wrote:
> What we're trying to do right now is more or less keep track of
> patches in Debian packages. Joey proposes to use bug reports for
> that. It *does* make some sense, but it's far-fetched. Very
> far-fetched. Yes, we want to minimise bug count *and* diversion from
> upstream, but does that mean we have to map one onto the other?
> Let's assume for a minute that we accept that VCSs are the way
> forward and start to consider how we could track bugs in the VCS,
> alongside the code.
> Start to think about it this way, and stuff suddenly neatly aligns,
> at least in my world.
> Suddenly you can commit a patch and mark the bug fixed atomically.
> Suddenly, bug reports become commits in a branch, and keeping the
> branch empty is your goal.
> Divergence from upstream is represented in topic branches, and you
> want to keep the number of those minimal to not go insane.
> You also get all the benefits of a distributed system and if we find
> ways to cooperate with other distros via one and the same repository
> , bugs would be shared, but done right from the start .
> 0. http://vcs-pkg.org
> 1. http://madduck.net/blog/2008.05.06:how-launchpad-got-it-wrong
> I have no details on this yet, but the general idea. Let's not
> create more dependence on our aging BTS, please.
> And yes, I will try to create a wiki page summarising this subthread
> in the next few weeks, if the idea isn't completely unrealistic.
Have you seen bugs everywhere (http://www.bugseverywhere.org) ? It's a
distributed bug tracker that stores bug information as metadata in VCS
I don't think it's exactly what you're talking about but it may be a
source of inspiration.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----