Slashdot Mirror
Bugzilla 2.18 Goes Gold
bugger writes "After almost three years of development, the Bugzilla project has released long-waited Bugzilla 2.18. It contains many new features, a huge number of bug fixes, some security updates, and more. It is also the first Bugzilla version to run unmodified on Windows. In parallel, security release 2.16.8 and a new development snapshot 2.19.2 have been announced."
January 15 lists two entries ... talk about last minute programming!
Gamercentric.com - GAMING HEAVEN
Does anyone have a good comparison of Bugzilla and Fog Creek Bugz?
I've always hated bugzilla, don't know why. Well, one of the reasons is why everybody uses it via a web interface, not through a mailing list (like de debian bug tracking system).This is one of the reasons why kernel developers don't like bugzilla - you've to waste too many time through the web interfaces
A bug tracking system should help to the developers, it shouldn't be a wall you've to break. I think new ideas are needed.
1) Bugs should not have owners. This is th approach taken by Joel (thy joelonsoftware.com guy) when creating Fozbug. Since you want to allow everybody to fix bugs (specially in OSS) everybody should be allowed to reopen or close a bug
2) distributed system. For a example of this, look at Bitkeeper in the linux development.
LiveJournal? they seem to do pretty well with MySQL...sounds like they might be the biggest mysql user around? Just a guess.
I've used bugzilla before on projects that were solely internal. But now I'm working for a new company that does custom software development for outside customers. I'd like each customer to be able to log in and see their own bugs, but not any of the other customers' (ie, other projects') bugs. Of course, developers should see all bugs.
So, is there a way to restricts the "products" that someone can see by login in Bugzilla?
- In Capitalist America, law violates YOU!
Well, this shouldn't be an issue with bug tracking software, but it can be rather more difficult to get shared hosting with Postgres as opposed to MySQL. That fact is due to inertia, but typical web applications should try to at least be compatible with MySQL for this reason. Not sure why Bugzilla isn't portable; I thought Perl had excellent DB abstraction facilities available. It's not as simple as having an abstraction layer, of course, but it seems like such a system would have been designed for portability from the start to support Oracle, SQL Server, etc...database servers you are likely to see in a place where you use bug tracking software.
Bugzilla is one of the few Open Source applications that really have possibility for taking over significant "market share" at business world. But IMHO Buzilla still lacks several key features that would make it a really strong choise.
.msi installer that would install Apache, MySQL, Perl and any other needed software to get Bugzilla up and running as easily as possible.
Don't get me wrong. I have been using Bugzilla via web interface in a couple of ocassions and it has a lot of potential. Especially since other (commercial) bug tracking softwares are really crappy in general.
What Bugzilla could really use:
- Better user interface. We need restrictions and a lot of usability improvements. Now bugzilla may be good for developers, but we should consider also other interest groups: product management, customers, customer support people, testers etc. All of these need better REPORTS in order to see what is the status of ***their*** issues.
- Easier installation. If Firefox can be installed by a Windows installer, so can Bugzilla. We could really use a simple
Does it work with mod_perl yet? This was the biggest obstacle the last time I had a look at installing Bugzilla.