All of this user’s content is licensed under CC BY 4.0

  • 9 Posts
  • 21 Comments
Joined 11 months ago
cake
Cake day: August 3rd, 2023

help-circle
















  • It’s very very useful when looking for bugs to at the very least have a central search, I’ve encountered issues before which are filed against a completely different app than the one I’m encountering it in (usually because the issue is actually in a library that both use), which I would have missed otherwise. Having a single database also allows then moving bugs between projects in cases such as that without having to recreate it and linking the old one to the new one.

    Perhaps a middle ground would be to organize individual repositories under an organization, like on github, where the organization has a global bug tracker, as well as each project.




  • I wouldn’t necessarily say that, it does work well for a lot of projects when used as an all in one package to have all development on, especially when it’s a public instance for many different projects such as GitHub.

    Oh I wasn’t necessarily accusing Github, or any other service of being bloated, I was making more of a general statement.

    the nice thing about it is that it’s a central bug database

    I’m honestly not sure that a central database for bugs is the best of ideas. The issues for a project should, ideally, be tied to, and integrated with that specific project. I think that it encourages more community input – people can find the components that they like, and delve into that specific component, and its community without needing to worry about anything else in the ecosystem. It may be too overwhelming for someone to have to interact with everything from every other project in the ecosystem, instead of just what they are interested in.



  • I do like the more modular approach that they took – many services unfortunately go the route of trying to make an “everything app” which often leads to bloat. This is of course not to accuse Gitea, Gitlab, Github, etc. of bloat, I’m just saying, in general, I do understand why they took this approach, and I can certainly appreciate it. I will say that, compared to the usual git services (Gitlab, Github, Gitea, etc.) it is severely lacking polish.

    So KDE at the minimum could just have hub + git + lists (for patches), and keep Bugzilla as the single bug tracker, for example.

    I personally despise bugzilla. It’s one of my least favorite parts about contributing to KDE. I personally find it very unintuitive, and messy. The UX of the service, on the whole, is not a pleasure.