A bug tracking mechanism that sucks significantly less than FogBugs! Why can no one get this right? It's not rocket science.
James Edward Gray II
What would you like to see? I feel pretty much the same way, but
maybe we should get some requirements out there...
···
On 4/27/06, James Edward Gray II <james@grayproductions.net> wrote:
A bug tracking mechanism that sucks significantly less than FogBugs!
Why can no one get this right? It's not rocket science.James Edward Gray II
Nothing can be as bad as the old version of HEAT we are using at my
company. It makes Bugzilla look great. I have never used FogBugz
myself. Still it is funny that Joel has become such an online
authority on software, yet his product isn't all that great? Something
is wrong there...
Anyhow, I think a RoR bug tracker would be nice. Besides SimpleTicket
I think there are some other efforts (as usual), so it might be good
to list them here. The other I know if is a private effort for the
Haiku (formerly OpenBeOS) project. I'll email the author of that to
get more details.
Ryan
···
On 4/27/06, James Edward Gray II <james@grayproductions.net> wrote:
A bug tracking mechanism that sucks significantly less than FogBugs!
Why can no one get this right? It's not rocket science.
well ... "sucks less" is incredibly subjective.. I think FogBugz sucks FAR
less than Bugzilla, but some people think the opposite.
Some of us actually are trying to make something simple, and good, in RoR.
Although if you're interested in checking out the code behind it (GPL
License) I *Strongly* recommend avoiding the main branch and instead check
out the branches/developers/masukomi version. It's where all the current
work is being done before merging everything back into the main trunk.
Joining the mailing list would also be an excellent idea for anyone who
actually wants to try and keep up with what's happening and why, or just
wants to put in their two cents worth.
-Kate
The *number one* focus, should be on how quickly the developer can deal with requests. Period. Do I need to repeat that? I better:
!!!The *number one* focus, should be on how quickly the developer can deal with requests!!!
Now, if I get a request, click to go to a page, wait on a load, read a little, click to deal with it, wait on a load... TOO LATE, you're already bugging me!
Honestly, I imagine it would be hard to beat directly replying to the email, so that would be my first choice. I have to do that at some point anyway, to tell the user I fixed it (or whatever).
And while I am whining, the title field should NOT be optional.
Thanks. 
James Edward Gray II
···
On Apr 27, 2006, at 3:06 PM, Wilson Bilkovich wrote:
On 4/27/06, James Edward Gray II <james@grayproductions.net> wrote:
A bug tracking mechanism that sucks significantly less than FogBugs!
Why can no one get this right? It's not rocket science.James Edward Gray II
What would you like to see? I feel pretty much the same way, but
maybe we should get some requirements out there...
Ryan Leavengood wrote:
···
On 4/27/06, James Edward Gray II <james@grayproductions.net> wrote:
A bug tracking mechanism that sucks significantly less than FogBugs!
Why can no one get this right? It's not rocket science.Nothing can be as bad as the old version of HEAT we are using at my
company. It makes Bugzilla look great. I have never used FogBugz
myself. Still it is funny that Joel has become such an online
authority on software, yet his product isn't all that great? Something
is wrong there...
Many people love FogBugz. It recently won a Jolt award.
FogBugz is opinionated software and if your opinions aren't too strong, or if your opinions about software development agree with Joel's, then you might love FogBugz.
--
Ray
Ray Baxter wrote:
...>
Many people love FogBugz. It recently won a Jolt award.
FogBugz is opinionated software and if your opinions aren't too strong, or if your opinions about software development agree with Joel's, then you might love FogBugz.
All software is opinionated. Software is opinionated reality.
People typically don't notice it, though, unless their opinions differ. Then they complain how much the software sucks.
···
--
James Britt
"In Ruby, no one cares who your parents were, all they care
about is if you know what you are talking about."
- Logan Capaldo
I have to disagree here. If you want fast response nothing beats Phone and
IM.
The point of a bug tracker is not to facilitate fastest responses to bugs it
is to *track* bugs.
Many systems diverge on WHY you should be tracking the bugs or WHAT you
should do with the information gained by tracking them.
As for responding to the e-mail being your first choice I'm pretty sure that
FogBugz lets you do exactly that. Conversations can be had in e-mail that
all get tacked on to the end of the appropriate bug. I may be mistaken on
this but I don't think so.
-Kate
···
On 4/27/06, James Edward Gray II <james@grayproductions.net> wrote:
On Apr 27, 2006, at 3:06 PM, Wilson Bilkovich wrote:
> On 4/27/06, James Edward Gray II <james@grayproductions.net> wrote:
>> A bug tracking mechanism that sucks significantly less than FogBugs!
>> Why can no one get this right? It's not rocket science.
>>
>> James Edward Gray II
>>
>
> What would you like to see? I feel pretty much the same way, but
> maybe we should get some requirements out there...The *number one* focus, should be on how quickly the developer can
deal with requests. Period. Do I need to repeat that? I better:!!!The *number one* focus, should be on how quickly the developer
can deal with requests!!!Now, if I get a request, click to go to a page, wait on a load, read
a little, click to deal with it, wait on a load... TOO LATE, you're
already bugging me!Honestly, I imagine it would be hard to beat directly replying to the
email, so that would be my first choice. I have to do that at some
point anyway, to tell the user I fixed it (or whatever).And while I am whining, the title field should NOT be optional.
Thanks.
James Edward Gray II
--
-Kate
(masukomi@gmail.com)