cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Ricardo Rocha" <>
Subject RE: xBug -Reply
Date Thu, 20 Jan 2000 18:12:11 GMT
On Jan-20-2000 Scott Boag wrote:
> I hate to rain on the parade, but I strongly feel that
> should work off a single bug tracking system so that bugs can be
> cross-posted and transferred.  I would rather see one of the existing bug
> tracking systems be used ASAP... I've been pretty upset that one isn't up
> yet.

I concur with Scott in that (à la Highlander) there should be only one.
Bugzilla would be probably the most appropriate option, save xBug
happened to materialize soon and in a truly acceptable form.

> If people do want to write another bug tracking system, I feel it
> should be done as a separate project from Cocoon, it should be done
> orthogonally to the needs of, and should be adapted
> by on it's merits.  A bug tracking system is too important
> and central to the well-being of the projects to do anything else.

It appears to me that the proposed bug tracking system _is_ a separate
project from Cocoon.

Personally (god forgive me!) I'm interested in it fundamentally as a
testbed for a dynamic XML development methodology as well as to
test XSP's capabilities as a dynamic tag processing language. From
this (shamefully selfish?) point of view, it could well be another
database-driven application...

Also, imo, John's and Kevin's manifest intention is to _learn_ Cocoon
technology around this project.

Thus, there appears to be a strong "academic" motivation. (I'm afraid
to appear too anarchistic but... what the heck!)

That said, I'd like to contrast this open-source endeavor with that of a
commercial software company.

In the latter, it would be an inadmissible waste of time and money to
reinvent the wheel, especially around such a critical component.

Here, though, I feel we can afford this luxury as long as we get what
seems to be our collective motivation: learning, testing, improving...

I wouldn't be surprised if something really cool turns out from xBug
(as I wouldn't either if the opposite was the case, :-))

Should this live long and prosper, we'll revisit Scott's statement:

  > [xBug] should be adapted by on it's merits

View raw message