Home
| Calendar
| Mail Lists
| List Archives
| Desktop SIG
| Hardware Hacking SIG
Wiki | Flickr | PicasaWeb | Video | Maps & Directions | Installfests | Keysignings Linux Cafe | Meeting Notes | Linux Links | Bling | About BLU |
I've just setup Mantis and as a light weight bug tracking system, it's quite good. (Well, I've only used it for 1/2 a day or so, configuring it.) It has a nice feature to setup custom fields which makes it configurable enough to tailor to my clients needs. So far so good with this one... Cheers. Steve. www.mantisbt.org Tom Metro wrote: > John Abreau wrote: >> I really like Request Tracker; I've been using it since 2000, and I've >> been very satisfied with it. > > I've been using RT heavily for only a couple of years, and having used > BugZilla for many years, I found RT lacking in several areas. > > I think RT excels as a general purpose ticketing system, particularly if > you want strong email integration. But when it comes to specifically > tracking software development, I find that RT is perhaps a generation > behind the curve. > > For example, RT lacks a bunch of fields that are commonly found in > software bug reports. They can be added, but its up to you to do that. > The workflow process (the stages a ticket goes through) it provides is > less ideal for software development (but again, can somewhat be > customized). And then there are a bunch of little annoyances for > software projects, such as the way it collapses white space in postings, > thus trashing formatted code fragments. Also, unlike BugZilla, it > doesn't automatically hyperlink references to other tickets (bugs). > > Despite this, I wouldn't necessarily jump to BugZilla for my next > project. After years of using these systems it has become apparent > that what you really want in a ticketing system is a combination of > project management features (as it's common these days to track all > development tasks, not just bugs, using tickets), document management > features (wiki area for the bug description or specification), > discussion (per-ticket and project wide), notifications (both email > and RSS), and version control integration. > > Trac (http://trac.edgewall.org/) has been mentioned numerous times on > this list. On paper it seems to come close to meeting the above > requirements, but I've only had superficial exposure to it so far. > > > Bill Horne wrote: >> If I read the page correctly, RT won't run under Windows... > > Given that it is written in Perl, I'd be surprised if it couldn't. It > may need some additional software added to the machine, like a mail > transport. I'm sure the link someone posted has more details. > > >> ...I'd like to know which open-source ticketing systems have been >> deployed the longest and which ones have the largest user base... > > Both RT and BugZilla are among the oldest open source issue tracking > programs available. They probably both date back to the late 90's if > not earlier. > > Given that RT is more general purpose, I'd guess it might have wider > adoption among corporations, and perhaps a higher number of > installations, but I'd bet there are more people with BugZilla logins, > given its frequent use on popular open source projects. > > >> Off the top of my head, in addition to the usual >> who/what/when/why/where I'd like to have: >> >> * Quoted resolution date/time >> * Expected resolution date/time > > What's the difference between these? The developer's opinion vs. the > project manager's opinion? > > >> * Duration since start of incident >> * Hours >> * Business Hours > > One of the annoyances with RT is that times are tracked in minutes. > Not hours and minutes - just minutes. This gets even more annoying if > you're working on a scale of days. > > Neither RT or Bugzilla have a running clock since the incident was > reported, that I'm aware of (certainly not taking into account > business hours), but they both track the date the incident was > reported, and I think both will show the number of days old an > incident is in some reports. > > Both tools are fairly weak on some of these project management features. > > >> * Duration since last callback >> * Historical info for customer >> * Number of incidents >> * Average time tickets were open >> * Average Technician/Engineer time per incident >> * Average cost to repair >> * Duration since last incident > > I'm not aware of either tool providing canned reports for any of these > metrics, though some can be easily obtained by running queries through > the standard query UI. Others would require writing some custom code. > > >> Of course, I'd like management screens: >> >> * Number of tickets open >> * Highest duration >> * Average duration past 24/48/settable (rolling) >> * Tickets over n hours >> * Tickets for top 5/50/settable customers > > While number of tickets open is easily obtained, as is tickets per > developer, project, component, etc. I think you'll find the others are > less easy to extract from BugZilla and RT. Both tools seem to focus > more on usability from the perspective of the individual developer, > and have less to offer for the project manager looking to gather > aggregate statistics. > > -Tom > -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups | |
We also thank MIT for the use of their facilities. |