Re: [ros-general] Bug-tracking systems

At 14.53 05/05/2002, you wrote:

First of all, I've found a bug in Scarab: it doesn't prevent accidental 
double submission of an issue (double-click on the submit button). Maybe it 
should assign an internal non-sequential id/GUID to every issue in addition 
to the id (but it sounds more and more complicated as I write it)

>Bugzilla is perl based and Scarab is based on Java servlet technology.

Frankly, I don't give a damn ;-) Seriously, I think the only that should be 
worried about an implementation are the implementors (maintainers and 
contributors) and the deployers (administrators). We users don't care as 
long as it looks cool and it's easy to use ;-) Entirely your choice here, IMHO

>* The Scarab UI is more intuitive and have a task based (kind of like your 
>usual Windows wizards) layout. Scarab guides you through your tasks, 
>whereas Bugzilla usually present all information in one big form for you 
>to fill out.

Urk! the Bugzilla forms are huge and messy. They're enough to make you 
change your mind about filing a bug. Point for Scarab

>* Scarab has better online help. Help is always just one click away and it 
>opens in a new window whereas Bugzilla on some pages has a link to a large 
>page with information (i.e. you have to leave the page to get help).

Non-modal help rules. Point for Scarab

>* Scarab is more generel in it's choice of names and more flexible. In 
>Bugzilla you create bug reports, in Scarab you create issues. In Scarab 
>you can define an issue called bug report and define your own attributes 
>for this issue (like description, sverity and status). You can even define 
>their input type (basicly how they are displayed) to string, integer, 
>drop-down list, etc. And best of all, they are searchable too!

Actually, I find Scarab's terminology still very confusing. For example, in 
all bug tracking systems I come across, I measure how hard is finding out 
ALL bugs/issues in a module, sorted by date. Sadly, in Scarab it's still 
very counter-intuitive, and I have to resort to the help to find out how to 
do it

And some templates/schemas have to be customized for ReactOS. For example, 
the "operating system" attribute doesn't really make sense for issues in 
the core OS module ;-)

>* And finally, the Scarab UI look is kick ass nice ;o)

Right. I think it's even better than reactos.com's (personal opinion: those 
blurred bitmaps and pastel colors suck). Still, Wine HQ's site is cooler 
than both ;-)

We should (could?) standardize on a color/font scheme, for the web site and 
user interface. I mean, IBM has the white and deep blue, Microsoft has the 
sky blue and sand gray, Sun has the eggplant purple and gray, etc. We have 
a logo (well, if the radioactive warning symbol is definitive ;-), we miss 
a color scheme