Markus Fritsche wrote:
> Julian Fitzell wrote:
> 
>> Mantis has projects which group bugs.  They're easy to add - any user 
>> with appropriate access permissions can do so.  I find Mantis to be 
>> clean and fairly simple for technical people (which is probably fine 
>> in this case) but it doesn't seem to be simple enough for 
>> non-tech-savvy end-users.  Also, I haven't done any development on it 
>> in ages because I just can't stand working in PHP these days :S - but 
>> I do know you would definitely want to be using the newest release 
>> candidate in the 0.18.x series instead of the 0.17.x release.
> 
> 
> Two thoughts I have: first, we shouldn't suffer from nih (and so should 
> evaluate the use of such tools), on the other hand, I think it's not 
> good to introduce one tool after another.

Yeah, I'm not necessarily recommending we go that way, just adding 
information to Goran's recommendation.

> What is similiar between mantis and BFAV, and what is different? How 
> much work would be needed to enhance BFAV (or to integrate it)? Or are 
> these two for complete different jobs?

Well, I see BFAV more as a patch management tool, whereas mantis is an 
issue management tool.  Now clearly patches address issues so the two 
systems should be integrated (which doesn't necessarily mean they need 
to be the same tool).  Short term, they could be linked just by 
referring to the issue number in the fix's preamble; but obviously it 
would be ideal if the systems were more tightly integrated.  I've 
occasionally thought about writing an issue tracker in Seaside but, 
really, I wrote an issue tracker in university and I worked on Mantis 
for a year; I don't ever want to write an issue tracker again. :)

Certainly a beautiful integrated system could be developed.  But who's 
going to do it?  And when?  We may want to improve our process 
incrementally rather than waiting for the Ultimate Solution.

Julian