Re: [dev] interested in issue tracker dev

From: markus schnalke <>
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2012 22:48:04 +0100

[2012-01-13 17:28] Paul Onyschuk <>
> On Fri, 13 Jan 2012 15:48:43 +0100
> markus schnalke wrote:
> Mbox formats are human readable, and file per issues makes it
> accessible. Throwing everything into one file (like mbox mail archive)
> or splitting everything into zillon files (file per message like
> maildir) requires additional techniques/tools just to find interesting
> issue.

As you put all mails to one issue into one mbox file, you can put
mails into one mail folder as well. There's no difference there.

> History of issues in many cases is just garbage. What I need is status
> of issue and responses to specific issue. Git/Mercurial or any other
> version control system can provide history if you really need that.
> Almost every open source projects nowadays gives read access to source
> code repository, so what is the point of writing custom log format?

No custom log format, you just add some mail header lines to a new
message on receiving, that's all. At least to me, that appears to be

> This way you can also track interesting issues without subscribing to
> mailing list or using web interface.

I haven't said anything about mailing lists or web interfaces. But
well, you surely want a web interface (at least read-only) and you
probably want be able to subscribe to issues. The mail interface
really is the important part, as Anselm already said. When you want
control it by email, then consider building it upon email.

> Right now best interfaces for issue trackers are search engines (e.g.
> Google "site:adress_of_bug_tracker interesting issue") and mail
> archives (Gmane and so on) in my opinion.

Unless you want to make changes ...

Received on Fri Jan 13 2012 - 22:48:04 CET

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Jan 13 2012 - 23:00:03 CET