On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 12:13:26AM -0500, Tom Baker wrote:
> On the call, we agreed to use a combination of the Github Issues tracker for
> the Schema.org project [5] for some issues while recognizing that not we will
> not be able to expect everyone involved in the process to get up to speed --
> i.e., we will also need to use the dc-architecture list [10].
...
> [5] https://github.com/dcmi/schema.org/issues
Discussion on issues trackers has focused on Github (see above). On Monday's
Schema.org alignment call, we discussed issues trackers in general, and agreed
that the Github issues tracker could, in principle, be used for tracking issues
for other projects, such as the revision of DCAM. Using Github has the
advantage of not having to install software on the DCMI Web site (though it is
unclear how DCMI might archive the issues tracker locally, as part of its
historical record). We agreed to give this a try.
Lest we lose the other valuable suggestions, however, here is a summary of
other possibilities:
-- There is a nice wiki page about issue tracking at W3C [1].
-- RoundUp [2] is a ten-year-old Python project, used to
track Python and IETF projects, and is supposed to be easy to install
and easier to use than Bugzilla. Baden reports that it works well.
-- Baden, Mark, and Bernard like Jira (from Atlassian), free for use by open-source
projects [4,5]. Bruce dislikes Jira, finding Github's issue tracker more elegant.
-- Jon likes Github [6,7] and suggests maintaining related documents in Github
as well. Github is free, the issues tracking interface is
simple, effective, and nicely tied to documents hosted at github. Github
itself is an excellent centralized document repository for distributed
version control. Bruce points out another feature relevant here: organization
support.
-- Peter suggests considering Trac -- integrated issue tracking, repository
and wiki, easy to deploy and use, a large community, and tons of plugins.
Thomas Fischer notes that the issue tracker should serve as a tool to manage,
for example, the different questions arising from the review of the DCAM and to
merge the results into a coherent document -- something for which trac,
with its close integration of issue tracking and wiki, might be best suited.
-- Thomas also points out Google Code (http://code.google.com/).
I suggest we give Github a try, but Trac and Jira sound like good alternatives
to keep in mind.
In order to set up Github for DCAM issues, I believe we would need to set up a
DCAM project under http://github.com/dcmi. In this case, the Github issues
tracker would be used to track issues about documents in the DCMI wiki -- not
about documents under version control in Github -- but this is doable. Can
those of you with more experience please confirm that this is a reasonable
thing to do?
Tom
[1] http://www.w3.org/wiki/TrackingIssues
[2] http://roundup.sourceforge.net/
[4] http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira/overview?gclid=3DCK3vs9Saw60CFQ3Dtgod1iJoAA
[5] http://www.atlassian.com/software/views/open-source-license-request
[6] https://github.com/blog/831-issues-2-0-the-next-generation
[7] https://github.com/blog/699-making-github-more-open-git-backed-wikis
[8] http://trac.edgewall.org/
|