To try and reply in brief, I don't think we need a better-defined
process before we switch to a better bug  tracker.  It is great to think
about how to make sure bugs do eventually get dealt with, etc., but we
don't have make every possible improvement to our infrastructure before
we make a single improvement.

We do have a process already, even if it's not described with reams of
policy documents.  Bug-fixing people fix bugs when they feel like it. 
Such people can use tool support.  Squeak-using people report bug by
emailing the list with [BUG] in the subject.  These people could use
better tool support as well.


A decent bug tracker can let people do things like:

	- find a list of all open bugs
	- find a list of all open bugs regarding Celeste
	- report a bug that a user found in Tetris
	- check on what other users have reported about Tetris, to see if the
bug has already been found

This functionality is just the ticket for our current process, and it is
likely to be very useful in whatever process gets dreamed up next.

I disagree that BFAV already does all these things for us, though I'd be
happy to be proven wrong.

I used to think that bug trackers were overkill for us, but I  have
entirely switched my mind.  Largely this is because of working in Debian
and seeing how nice it is to have a list of all open bugs on each
package.  As well, though, the Squeak community just seems to be
changing; cleanup tasks are getting more popular.


-Lex