[arch-general] Bad attitude in flyspray again!

[Allan McRae]

On 12/03/10 07:57, Hussam Al-Tayeb wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 14:59 -0600, Aaron Griffin wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 2:19 PM, Dimitrios Apostolou<jimis at gmx.net>  wrote:
>>> My primary complaint against flyspray is that it doesn't allow comments to
>>> be added after the bug is closed. The only way is by doing a request to
>>> reopen the bug, and even in that case your comment is not added to the
>>> comment list.
>>>
>>> Wouldn't this functionality remedy the "closing bugs early" situation? Is it
>>> supported in flyspray?
>>
>> Commenting on bugs after they are closed will just annoy the
>> developer. If you have an issue with the fix or something, reopening
>> is the right action. If you have information to add, then add it to
>> the wiki, as THAT is the source of documentation, not flyspray
>
>
> You should consider moving to bugzilla. mozilla and gnome use it. it's
> an excellent bug tracker. I've used it to report literally hundreds or
> gnome or mozilla bugs. not only is it easier on developers but it is
> also better for users. flyspray is not as smart as bugzilla.
> this won't work of course if there is no converter.

You seriously think bugzilla is easier to use?   I think the only 
advantage of moving to bugzilla is that we would get less bug reports as 
the interface would put most people off.  Since using Flyspray, I 
really, really, really hate having to file bug reports in bugzilla 
(which is why I encourage users to file bugs upstream).

Allan