Python to use a non open source bug tracker?

[Ilias Lazaridis]

Re: Python to use a non open source bug tracker?

Robert Kern wrote:

Giovanni Bajo wrote:

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.

?? 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

..

[Martin v. Löwis]

Re: Python to use a non open source bug tracker?

Ben Finney schrieb:

>Giovanni Bajo schrieb:

>>It is an extremely bad picture for an open source flag like Python
>>to go to a vendor for such an easy requirement as a bug database.

>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.

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]

Re: Python to use a non open source bug tracker?

Ben Finney wrote:

"David Goodger" <dgoodger@gmail .comwrites:
>
>

>>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".
>

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
--
Steve Holden +44 150 684 7255 +1 800 494 3119
Holden Web LLC/Ltd http://www.holdenweb.com
Skype: holdenweb http://holdenweb.blogspot.com
Recent Ramblings http://del.icio.us/steve.holden

[Fredrik Lundh]

Re: Python to use a non open source bug tracker?

Steve Holden wrote:

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]

Re: Python to use a non open source bug tracker?

Terry Reedy wrote:

"Ben Finney" <bignose+hate s-spam@benfinney. id.auwrote in message
news:87lknvelb3 .fsf@benfinney. id.au...
>

>>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.
>

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 +44 150 684 7255 +1 800 494 3119
Holden Web LLC/Ltd http://www.holdenweb.com
Skype: holdenweb http://holdenweb.blogspot.com
Recent Ramblings http://del.icio.us/steve.holden

[Steve Holden]

Re: Python to use a non open source bug tracker?

Fredrik Lundh wrote:

Steve Holden wrote:
>
>

>>>you're not on the infrastructure list, I hear. python.org could still need a
>>>few more roundup volunteers, but it's not like nobody's prepared to con-
>>>tribute manhours. don't underestimate the community.
>>>

>>
>>No, I'm not on the infrastructure list, but I know that capable people
>>*are*: and you know I am quite capable of donating my time to the cause,
>>when I have it to spare (and sometimes even when I don't).

>
>
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 +44 150 684 7255 +1 800 494 3119
Holden Web LLC/Ltd http://www.holdenweb.com
Skype: holdenweb http://holdenweb.blogspot.com
Recent Ramblings http://del.icio.us/steve.holden

[Steve Holden]

Re: Python to use a non open source bug tracker?

Ilias Lazaridis wrote:

Giovanni Bajo wrote:
>

>>Hello,
>>
>>I just read this mail by Brett Cannon:
>>http://mail.python.org/pipermail/pyt...er/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?
>>--
>>Giovanni Bajo

>
>
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 "requiremen ts" 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
--
Steve Holden +44 150 684 7255 +1 800 494 3119
Holden Web LLC/Ltd http://www.holdenweb.com
Skype: holdenweb http://holdenweb.blogspot.com
Recent Ramblings http://del.icio.us/steve.holden

[Fredrik Lundh]

Re: Python to use a non open source bug tracker?

Steve Holden wrote:

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]

Re: Python to use a non open source bug tracker?

Steve Holden <steve@holdenwe b.comwrites:

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.

--
\ "Why, I'd horse-whip you if I had a horse." -- Groucho Marx |
`\ |
_o__) |
Ben Finney

[Tim Peters]

Re: Python to use a non open source bug tracker?

[Ben Finney]

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

[Terry Reedy]

I think name calling is out of line here.

Name calling is always out of line on comp.lang.pytho n. 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

[Steve Holden]

Re: Python to use a non open source bug tracker?

Ben Finney wrote:

Steve Holden <steve@holdenwe b.comwrites:
>
>

>>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.
>

In case readers are puzzled by the absence of the message to which Ben
replies above I should perhaps explain that I cancelled it having
decided that its language was immoderate and unfair to Ben.

regards
Steve
--
Steve Holden +44 150 684 7255 +1 800 494 3119
Holden Web LLC/Ltd http://www.holdenweb.com
Skype: holdenweb http://holdenweb.blogspot.com
Recent Ramblings http://del.icio.us/steve.holden

[Georg Brandl]

Re: Python to use a non open source bug tracker?

Ilias Lazaridis wrote:

Giovanni Bajo wrote:

>Hello,
>>
>I just read this mail by Brett Cannon:
>http://mail.python.org/pipermail/pyt...er/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?
>--
>Giovanni Bajo

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

Actually, it suggests two bugtracking tools, one of them written in
Python.

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

No, it's saying: "if the Python community is able to provide the
required amount of time to do the admin work, we'll use the
tool written in Python."

Anyway. The whole selection process is intransparent.

Steve has already pointed you to the wiki page.

Georg

[Fredrik Lundh]

Re: Python to use a non open source bug tracker?

Georg Brandl wrote:

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

>
Actually, it suggests two bugtracking tools, one of them written in
Python.

the announcemant's subject line said "recommenda tion for a new issue
tracker", though; not "we need the community's help before we can make a
final recommendation" .

in fact, only 20% of the announcement talked about Python; the rest was
something that looked a lot like a press release from the non-python
hosting company, so it's not that strange that people missed the few
sentences in the middle that explained that the subject line wasn't
entirely accurate.

</F>

[Georg Brandl]

Re: Python to use a non open source bug tracker?

Fredrik Lundh wrote:

Georg Brandl wrote:
>

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

>>
>Actually, it suggests two bugtracking tools, one of them written in
>Python.

>
the announcemant's subject line said "recommenda tion for a new issue
tracker", though; not "we need the community's help before we can make a
final recommendation" .

Granted.

in fact, only 20% of the announcement talked about Python; the rest was
something that looked a lot like a press release from the non-python
hosting company, so it's not that strange that people missed the few
sentences in the middle that explained that the subject line wasn't
entirely accurate.

I actually stopped reading after Brett's signature, so I didn't have the
20% figure in my mind :)

Georg

[Giovanni Bajo]

Re: Python to use a non open source bug tracker?

Martin v. Löwis wrote:

>In fact, are you absolutely positive that you need so much effort to
>maintain an existing bugtracker installation? I know for sure that
>GCC's Bugzilla installation is pretty much on its own; Daniel Berlin
>does some maintainance every once in a while (upgrading when new
>versions are out, applying or writing some patches for most
>requested features in the community, or sutff like that), but it's
>surely not his job, not even part-time.

>
Daniel Berlin has put a tremendous amount of work into it. I know,
because I set up the first bug tracker for gcc (using GNATS), and
have been followed the several years of pondering fairly closely.
It was quite some work to set up GNATS, and it was even more work
to setup bugzilla.
>
For Python, we don't have any person similar to Daniel Berlin
(actually, we have several who *could* have done similar work,
but none that ever volunteered to do it). Don't underestimate
the work of somebody else.

Martin, I am by no means understimating Daniel's work. I am just noting that
the spare-time work he did is, by definition, much much lower than the "6-10
people" that the PSF infrastructure committee is calling for. I would like this
statement to be officially reduced to "2-3 people", since it is *really* not
required much more than that to setup a bug tracker installation, and no more
than 1 person to maintain it afterwards. *IF* there are more volunteers, that's
good, they can offload the maintenance work from a single maintainer; but I
think it's unfair to put such a high *requisite*.

We do not have 6-10 people maintaining SVN afterall, even if you wish we had :)
--
Giovanni Bajo