BFAV to shutdown or not shutdown

karl karl.ramberg at chello.se
Fri Apr 22 14:52:44 UTC 2005


stéphane ducasse wrote:

> but we are all poor idiots dave.
> Believe me, me the first :)
>
> But your point is valid, history is important.
>
I hate to be a party pooper, but Mantis sucks!
I used BFAV quite a lot and liked to be using Squeak to fix it self.
Now I don't know the process and I have lost most interest in it :-(
Karl

> On 22 avr. 05, at 12:54, David T. Lewis wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Apr 21, 2005 at 11:27:12AM -0500, Ken Causey wrote:
>>
>>> Primarily because we janitors are human and the BFAV database serves 
>>> for
>>> now as a useful backup to help us keep track of what issues we have and
>>> have not properly handled.  If we miss one then it is very easy to 
>>> catch
>>> by looking in BFAV.  Secondarily, there are still issues in BFAV that
>>> should be handled in the old way.  To do that harvesters need to be 
>>> able
>>> to close the issue, mark them as approved, mark them as being in an
>>> update etc.  All this relies on BFAV being able to receive new reports
>>> by email.
>>
>>
>> Keeping BFAV available is a good thing. There are lots of issues and
>> concerns with history documented in BFAV and not (yet) in Mantis. As
>> an example, bug #989 in Mantis reports a problem that is a show-stopper
>> for Tweak. The original root problem dated back at least a couple of
>> years, and some poor idiot had provided an incorrect fix that ultimately
>> resulted in the show-stopper for Tweak. The history of this was all
>> in BFAV, and the idiot in question was able to look it up in BFAV and
>> provide enough background to help sort things out.
>>
>> The moral of the story is that we have a lot of old issues that need
>> to be managed, and BFAV is still useful even if the issue management
>> process has moved to Mantis.
>>
>> Dave
>>
>>
>
>
>





More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list