[OSM-talk] Unification of OpenStreetBugs an Trac
richard at systemed.net
Mon Dec 1 09:18:20 GMT 2008
Gervase Markham wrote:
> Richard Fairhurst wrote:
>> I'm not sure why the need to reuse existing software at all. Bugtracking
>> the sort of thing you expect to find in 'Rails For Dummies' as My First
>> Rails App - if you’ve got a decent framework it’s pretty elementary.
> As someone who's spent the last nine years working on one, and seen
> several putative competitors arrive and fade (Scarab, anyone?), I'd
> dispute that. You can do simple things simply, yes, but you always find
> you have more requirements than you think.
Sure, but the question - here as in anywhere - is whether you have the same
"more requirements" as the people who wrote the bugtracker.
_Generally_ OSM has found that, for the external-facing stuff, we rarely do
have the same "more requirements". (Clearly our internal-facing stuff like
trac is fairly par for the course; we have a svn repository like any other
open source project.) Famously, OSM rejected the entire classical GIS stack,
and now everyone thinks it's obvious but three years ago they were telling
us we were mad.
Even when we do use something that wasn't invented here, the best fits are
those which were at least partially developed with OSM in mind - from Mapnik
to the ODbL. TBH I wouldn't have even considered this application as a
bug-tracker had the comparison not been made on the mailing list.
Good ol' Joel Spolsky again: "A lot of software developers are seduced by
the old '80/20' rule. It seems to make a lot of sense: 80% of the people
use 20% of the features... Unfortunately, it's never the same 20%. Everybody
uses a different set of features."
Anyway, none of this is getting any code written. :)
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Unification-of-OpenStreetBugs-an-Trac-tp20704897p20768510.html
Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
More information about the talk