Subject: Re: Why Is There No Bug Tracker And Why Are Patches Sent Instead Of Pull Requests

From: Andreas Ericsson <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2012 15:18:46 +0100

On 03/02/2012 08:03 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:

... a very concise and exact response.

> 
> In any case, any solution that demands more things to be done by people
> near the core developers than they currently are already doing will make
> things worse by exacerbating the problem that comes from a bottleneck in
> the process.  I do not think your "The maintainer triages and assigns
> issues to other developers" or "The assigned developer marks the issue as
> 'done' after fixing it" will fly very well, regardless of the use of any
> bug tracker.
> 

It works very well when there's the incentive of roof over one's head
and food on one's table to take care of the assigned issues. However,
nothing stops a git developer from saying "sorry, I'm busy" when being
assigned really, really boring tasks that they really don't feel like
doing.

One thing I could see a bugtracker would be good for is to get companies
that use git to vote on issues or features using real money. Developers
can then pick up the issue and do something with them.

Apart from that, I doubt there's much incentive for the people who do
any of the work to pick up issues nobody cares about. The number of bugs
falling through the cracks is too small to go through a lot of work just
to keep track of them, and the ones that do are ones that are primarily
of the bikeshedding variant or such weird corner-cases that they don't
happen in 99.999% of all use-cases git was designed for and is bid to
handle.

-- 
Andreas Ericsson                   [email-masked]
OP5 AB                             www.op5.se
Tel: +46 8-230225                  Fax: +46 8-230231

Considering the successes of the wars on alcohol, poverty, drugs and
terror, I think we should give some serious thought to declaring war
on peace.