Python to use a non open source bug tracker?

[=?ISO-8859-15?Q?=22Martin_v=2E_L=F6wis=22?=]

* A data export is available if we decide to switch. [...]

Out of curiosity, how is this obtained? Is this any plan to take a daily export
or so?

Exactly so. Atlassian would generate a daily dump, and we would copy it
to a machine on python.org with a cron job.

Regards,
Martin

 

[=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=22Martin_v=2E_L=F6wis=22?=]

what I was trying to say (between the lines) was that not only have
the people on that list worked hard to do the evaluation (not to mention
all the developers around the world that has worked even harder to set
up test trackers)

That cannot be praised enough. Special thanks to Jonathan Nolen from
Atlassian to set up the Jira installation, Stefan Seefeld to set up
the Roundup installation, Alec Thomas for the Trac installation,
and James Henstridge for adding Python to the Launchpad.

To all those who complain that their favorite software XYZ wasn't
considered: apparently, nobody in the community bothered enough to
respond to the call for trackers. If nobody experienced with the
software thinks it is worthwhile to set up a demo it,
why should we review it?

Regards,
Martin

 

[Ben Finney]

Jira is given away for free to open source projects that want to use
it.

Just as Bitkeeper was.

"Given away for free" has nothing to do with the criteria being
discussed here.

 

[Ben Finney]

You fail to recognize that Python is *already* using a non-free software
for bug tracking, as do thousands of other projects. So from that point
of view, the status wouldn't change.

The whole point of moving *from* SF *to* another bug tracker is to
improve the situation, surely.

You already seem to acknowledge that using free-software tools to
develop Python is desirable. I don't see why you're being so obtuse in
this sub-thread on *why* it's desirable.

 

[Ben Finney]

Look at the results again. Jira and RoundUp tied for functionality,
but Jira has a hosting/admin offer behind it. That's huge. But
rather than declaring Jira the outright winner, which they could
have done, the committee has allowed the community to decide the
matter. If enough admins come forward, RoundUp will win.

I read that as a big push for "written in Python".

I prefer to read it as a big push for "not dependent on non-free
tools".

 

[Ilias Lazaridis]

Hello,

I just read this mail by Brett Cannon:
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-October/069139.html
where the "PSF infrastracture committee", after weeks of evaluation, recommends
using a non open source tracker (called JIRA - never heard before of course)
for Python itself.

Does this smell "Bitkeeper fiasco" to anyone else than me?

Fascinating.

The python foundation suggests a non-python non-open-source bugtracking
tool for python.

It's like saying: "The python community is not able to produce the
tools needed to drive development of python forward."

Anyway. The whole selection process is intransparent.

The commitee should have stated "goals" and "requirements" with a
public verification of the tools against them.

-

http://case.lazaridis.com/wiki/Tracking

..

 

[Terry Reedy]

The whole point of moving *from* SF *to* another bug tracker is to
improve the situation, surely.

The current situation is that the limitations and intermittant failures of
the SF tracker sufficiently impede the Python development process that some
people were motivated to do the work to find a better alternative.

You already seem to acknowledge that using free-software tools to
develop Python is desirable.

The committee already said so by saying that with other things equal, it
would choose Roundup.

I don't see why you're being so obtuse

I think name calling is out of line here.

Terry Jan Reedy

 

[Robert Hicks]

Hello,

I just read this mail by Brett Cannon:
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-October/069139.html
where the "PSF infrastracture committee", after weeks of evaluation, recommends
using a non open source tracker (called JIRA - never heard before of course)
for Python itself.

Does this smell "Bitkeeper fiasco" to anyone else than me?

No.

Robert

 

[Ben Finney]

I think name calling is out of line here.

So do I, which is why I addressed observed actions instead.

 

[Aahz]

I wonder why the PSF infrastructure committee believes that a group of 6-10
people is needed to "install and maintain" Roundup.

Because Roundup has been "the answer" for at least two or three years,
but somehow it never has gotten enough concerted attention to make it
happen. I'm sure that experience informed much of the Infrastructure
Committee's work.

I suspect in the end that if four or five people who are known to follow
through on their commitments volunteered that probably would be enough.

 

[Ilias Lazaridis]

No.

?? how do you know the answer??

anyway.

-

I don't think that a non-open-source system will be selected by the
responsible people.

Most possibly, they are aware about the basic requirements of an
infrastructure - which is control:

http://case.lazaridis.com/wiki/Host

..

 

[Guest]

The whole point of moving *from* SF *to* another bug tracker is to
improve the situation, surely.

You already seem to acknowledge that using free-software tools to
develop Python is desirable. I don't see why you're being so obtuse in
this sub-thread on *why* it's desirable.

I don't deny it's desirable; I deny it's a indispensable requirement.
I truly believe that Jira would be a useful bug tracker and improve
the situation, despite it being non-free software. This really is no
source of worry for me. I'm feeling more uneasy about the fact that
it is written in Java (but still, this wouldn't stop me from
recommending it as it is a useful and well-engineered piece of
software).

In this sub-thread, I complain about this FUD "Python is moving
to a non-free bug tracker" (suggesting that it is moving away
from a free bug tracker).

Regards,
Martin

 

[Steve Holden]

I prefer to read it as a big push for "not dependent on non-free
tools".

And I'd prefer it if you'd drop this subject. So, if you have nothing
new to say, kindly leave it. You have made your opinion known, as you
are fully entitled to do. Frankly I am getting less interested in your
opinion with each new post.

You appear to be prepared to go to any length short of providing effort
to support the open source tracker.

regards
Steve

 

[Fredrik Lundh]

You appear to be prepared to go to any length short of providing effort
to support the open source tracker.

http://www.userland.com/whatIsStopEnergy

</F>

 

[Steve Holden]

The current situation is that the limitations and intermittant failures of
the SF tracker sufficiently impede the Python development process that some
people were motivated to do the work to find a better alternative.




The committee already said so by saying that with other things equal, it
would choose Roundup.




I think name calling is out of line here.

Correct, besides which Ben seems to feel people are disagreeing on the
desirability of using open source software when in fact they are mostly
disagreeing about the *practicality* in this particular instance.

Compellingly absent from most critics' output is a statement to the
effect that they will volunteer their time to encourage the adoption of
Roundup, which is excluded only by the absence of a support infrastructure.

Time to shit or get off the pot, I'd say.

regards
Steve

 

[Steve Holden]

Steve Holden wrote:




what I was trying to say (between the lines) was that not only have
the people on that list worked hard to do the evaluation (not to mention
all the developers around the world that has worked even harder to set
up test trackers), there's also been a good community response to the
committee's call for "6-10 volunteers".

Excellent. I've just complained elsewhere in this thread that those
dissenting didn't appear to want to rectify the situation by offering
their time. It would be nice to be wrong about that.

regards
Steve

 

[Steve Holden]

Fascinating.

The python foundation suggests a non-python non-open-source bugtracking
tool for python.

It's like saying: "The python community is not able to produce the
tools needed to drive development of python forward."

Anyway. The whole selection process is intransparent.

The commitee should have stated "goals" and "requirements" with a
public verification of the tools against them.

Is there any stick in the known universe that you will grasp the *right*
end of?

http://wiki.python.org/moin/OriginalCallForTrackers

regards
Steve

 

[Fredrik Lundh]

Excellent. I've just complained elsewhere in this thread that those
dissenting didn't appear to want to rectify the situation by offering
their time. It would be nice to be wrong about that.

the dissenting won't contribute a thing, of course. they never ever do.
but not everyone is wired that way.

</F>

 

[Ben Finney]

And I'd prefer it if you'd drop this subject. So, if you have
nothing new to say, kindly leave it.

I'm happy to, but:

You appear to be prepared to go to any length short of providing
effort to support the open source tracker.

This was addressed in a previous post. I don't have the skills nor the
resources to do this. Yes, as has been pointed out, it actually *is*
far less effort to point out problems, than to solve them. That
doesn't detract from the value of pointing out problems.

This thread was started on the shock of realising that a non-free tool
was even being *considered* for the new Python bug tracker. Those are
the terms on which I've been arguing.

Apparently there are some people who *have* put themselves forward to
support a free-software tool. Great! My point all along has been that
Python's developers are well advised to consider *only* free-software
tools for supporting development of Python, and that from among those
the best tool for the job should be chosen.

As you say, nothing new has been said now for a while, so in the
absence of that I'm happy to leave it here.

 

[Tim Peters]

[Ben Finney]
[Terry Reedy]

I think name calling is out of line here.

Name calling is always out of line on comp.lang.python. Unless it's
done by Guido. Then it's OK. Anyone else, just remind them that even
Hitler had better manners. That always calms things down again.

loving-usenet-despite-that-it's-usenet-ly y'rs - tim