Re: Python to use a non open source bug tracker?
Giovanni Bajo wrote:
No, the announcement stated the situation in a very different way.
Asking for a group of maintainers to commit to an essential piece of
infrastructure is perfectly reasonable. Brett didn't ask for 6-10 full
time developer/sysadmins. He asked for typical commitment, which is up
to a few hours per week. The initial work will probably be significant,
but will undoubtedly taper off over time.
Go back to the original announcement:
"""
After evaluating the trackers on several points (issue creation,
querying, etc.), we reached a tie between JIRA and Roundup in terms of
pure tracker features.
"""
JIRA gets a leg up because of the hosting and administration also being
offered. But...
"""
If enough people step forward we will notify python-dev that Roundup
should be considered the recommendation of the committee and graciously
turn down Atlassian's offer.
"""
That is a perfectly reasonable offer. Put up or shut up.
That just shows that you were being naïve. The initial requirements
were published openly and clearly.
Yes, they did, and you should be thanking them instead of complaining.
If you feel so strongly, please volunteer.
-- David Goodger
Giovanni Bajo wrote:
The current request is: "please, readers of python-dev, setup a team of 6-10
people to handle roundup or we'll go to a non-free software for bug
tracking". This is something which I cannot cope with, and I'm *speaking*
up against. Were the request lowered to something more reasonable, I'd be
willing to *act*.
people to handle roundup or we'll go to a non-free software for bug
tracking". This is something which I cannot cope with, and I'm *speaking*
up against. Were the request lowered to something more reasonable, I'd be
willing to *act*.
Asking for a group of maintainers to commit to an essential piece of
infrastructure is perfectly reasonable. Brett didn't ask for 6-10 full
time developer/sysadmins. He asked for typical commitment, which is up
to a few hours per week. The initial work will probably be significant,
but will undoubtedly taper off over time.
Go back to the original announcement:
"""
After evaluating the trackers on several points (issue creation,
querying, etc.), we reached a tie between JIRA and Roundup in terms of
pure tracker features.
"""
JIRA gets a leg up because of the hosting and administration also being
offered. But...
"""
If enough people step forward we will notify python-dev that Roundup
should be considered the recommendation of the committee and graciously
turn down Atlassian's offer.
"""
That is a perfectly reasonable offer. Put up or shut up.
And besides the only thing I'm really sniping the PSF against is about
*ever* having thought of non-FLOSS software. This is something I *really*do
not accept. ... I just
disagree with their initial requirements (and I have not raised this point
before because, believe me if you can, I really thought it was obvious and
implicit).
*ever* having thought of non-FLOSS software. This is something I *really*do
not accept. ... I just
disagree with their initial requirements (and I have not raised this point
before because, believe me if you can, I really thought it was obvious and
implicit).
were published openly and clearly.
I do respect the fact
that the PSF committee did a thorough and correct evaluation:
that the PSF committee did a thorough and correct evaluation:
If you feel so strongly, please volunteer.
-- David Goodger
Comment