Geoffrey Halliwell wrote:
> Hi Vince,
>
> Bug Bridge was created to synchronize our internal and external bug
> tracking system, and it's just another piece in building our GlassFish
> eco-system.
>
Shouldn't/wouldn't that be a one-time operation:
push open/internal issues to the external tracking system
set internal db as read-only.
file/update issues on the external tracking system after that.
> It satisfies a most fundamental use-case for the external development
> community: what bugs exist in the module I'm working on?
> Is the
> bug/issue I'm seeing a known problem? Can I get to the data easily?
>
huh? Those sound like the reasons to have a tracking system. I wasn't
saying that we shouldn't have a tracking system.
> Also, merging the data makes it much easier to track a release.
And having a single bug tracking system makes it even easier, right?
> I've
> worked on a number of releases with multiple bug-tracking system, and
> trust me on this one - eventually it leads to confusion, and wastes time.
>
But it sounds like the bridge doesn't solve this problem in the most
effective way.
> Yes, it's important to file bugs. Yes, it's important to fix bugs. But
> it's also important to have one common database to record and track the
> quality issues.
>
Like I said, I was not arguing for the abandonment of bug tracking. I
just wonder how a bug bridge will create 'one common database'?
> MHO of course.
>
> Geoff
>
>
>