Re: [sup-talk] Choosing a bug tracker for Sup

[Nicolas Pouillard <nicolas.pouillard@gmail.com>]

Excerpts from Joe Wölfel's message of Mon Nov 02 21:40:21 +0100 2009:
> Excerpts from William Morgan's message of Mon Nov 02 09:50:08 -0500 2009:
> > 1. Web submission. The burden of creating a record should be on the
> > submitter---it's not too much to ask, and it saves developer time. This
> > also encourages reporters to provide relevant information like version,
> > platform, Ruby version, etc. upfront, since they can be prompted for
> > those data explicitly.
> > 
> > 2. Developer discussion via email. This is vital. There's no way I would
> > want to have a technical discussion using text boxes on a website. And
> > this discussion should be attached to the issue, of course.
> 
> Please ignore this suggestion if you feel it is stupid, but couldn't an
> internal sup-based bug submission perform prompting and validation tasks just
> as easily as a web form? Also, wouldn't it be better for automatically
> including or verifying operating system info, version info, libraries, etc?  
> 
> It seems like this might make for a more natural transition to email-based
> developer discussion, reduce the need for centralized infrastructure, make it
> easier for users to figure out how and where to submit a bug, and possibly make
> critical system and library information more accurate and detailed.

This is indeed a nice option. Add to sup a way to send a bug report. It could
simply be an email in the chosen format for bug reporting. And indeed the
bonus is more precise information.

However in the long run this only complementary with other way to report bugs.

-- 
Nicolas Pouillard
http://nicolaspouillard.fr
_______________________________________________
sup-talk mailing list
sup-talk@rubyforge.org
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/sup-talk