My list of requirements isn't so much a list of reqs as a list of features from bugzilla that we've found exceedingly useful. 0) keywords -- massively useful for targeting, filtering, etc. 1) Attachments on bugs (somewhat of a merge of the patch tracker and bug tracker, but also useful for attaching test cases, screenshots, etc.) 2) Being able to "watch" people - be notified when their bugs have events happen to them, e.g.. when they're on vacation. 3) Saving and recalling searches 4) non-web, non-email access to the database (e.g. take all the bugs assigned to so and so, and take those submitted by people in england, and set the keyword "never" to them). 5) scalability (in # of developers, # of users, # of bugs, # of 'versions', # of 'products', etc.) 6) Being able to migrate a bug from one product to another (not all that relevant for a Python-only bug tracker, except if the versions are handled as different products). 7) Bug linkages (depends on/blocks, duplicate handling, etc.) Useful things we've added to bugzilla include: 1) Ability to designate bugs as 'for internal use only' (not especially important for python-dev =) 2) an 'efficient' UI. The bugzilla default search results pages are very inefficient from a UI point of view. Andy McKay's version is much better, I think. Compare: http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/buglist.cgi?bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED&email1=&emailtype1=substring&emailassigned_to1=1&email2=&emailtype2=substring&emailreporter2=1&bugidtype=include&bug_id=&changedin=&votes=&chfieldfrom=&chfieldto=Now&chfieldvalue=&component=Address+Book&short_desc=&short_desc_type=allwordssubstr&long_desc=&long_desc_type=allwordssubstr&bug_file_loc=&bug_file_loc_type=allwordssubstr&status_whiteboard=&status_whiteboard_type=allwordssubstr&keywords=&keywords_type=anywords&field0-0-0=noop&type0-0-0=noop&value0-0-0=&cmdtype=doit&order=Reuse+same+sort+as+last+time and: http://bugs.activestate.com/buglist.cgi?product=&querytype=simple&bug_status=UNCONFIRMED&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED&email1=&emailtype1=substring&emailassigned_to1=1&bugidtype=include&bug_id=&changedin=&chfieldfrom=&chfieldto=Now&chfieldvalue=&short_desc=&short_desc_type=substring&long_desc=&long_desc_type=substring&bug_file_loc=&bug_file_loc_type=substring&status_whiteboard=&status_whiteboard_type=substring&keywords_type=anywords&field0-0-0=noop&type0-0-0=noop&value0-0-0=&order=bugs.priority%20ASC%2C%20bugs.bug_status%20ASC%2C%20map_assigned_to.login_name%20ASC%2C%20bugs.bug_id%20DESC As I've mentioned in the past, we used an earlier version of roundup and found it didn't scale well with thousands of users. I haven't look at the new roundup to know if it's dealt with the problems we had (way too much mail generation by default, much too brittle, and poorly architected =). It's also important to have flexibility in handling the bug cycle (who closes, who verifies, etc.). Both roundup and bugzilla did that pretty well. --david
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4