Slashdot Mirror
Best Integrated Issue-Tracker For Subversion?
JobSeeker writes "Now that subversion has merge tracking my boss wants to save money by dropping our expensive commercial solution. I've pretty much convinced myself that subversion can do the job. I like it. But what about integrated issue tracking? Version control without issue tracking is only half a solution. The TortoiseSVN docs say a little about bugzilla and not much else. What ready-to-play options (commercial or open source) exist for deploying subversion on commercial projects?"
trac + subversion works well.
We've been using Trac for a long time and it worked well.
We since discovered Redmine which does about the same job, is themed prettier and seems to be a bit easier to use. All in all Trac and Redmine both do about the same things.
Redmine has a built-in user management, which I'm taking advantage of in our SVN/Hg web server to authenticate users with (single sign on)
Redmine also has support for multiple projects in one tracker, whereas trac needs multiple installs for multiple disjointed projects. The workflow manager in Redmine is also really easy to use; no dicking about writing python scripts to control your workflow.
Redmine talks to Svn, Git, Mercurial, Bazzar and a couple of other source control tools, which is useful if you ever need to move on to those tools. Trac is pretty rooted on subversion, though it does have a Git plugin.
Both are pretty easy to install, but I had Redmine up and running in about 4 minutes whereas it took a bit of messing about to get Trac running.
Redmine also has the manager friendly theme (think that horrible facebook style) so managers will goo and gaa over it then sign off that it be implemented.
I drink to make other people interesting!
Tortise isn't an issue tracker, it's a front end to Subversion. The OP wants an issue tracker (Think Trac, Bugzilla, Redmine, etc) which is a different beast.
I drink to make other people interesting!
Off the top of my head, you've got Trac, CVSTrac, Redmine, Collaboa... Trac is pretty well established. CVSTrac (AKA SvnTrac when dealing with Subversion) is lean and mean and absurbdly quick to set up. Redmine is pretty new, but seems to have picked up a lot of good ideas. Collaboa looks nice, but development appears to have stagnated.
There's plenty of others, though. Commercially, things like FogBugz also have Subversion integration. But it's not exactly hard to find all this out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_issue_tracking_systems
Be aware that once you lock yourself into a combination of SCM and issue tracking system, migrating to another SCM is absolutely hellish. Hope you really, really like Subversion.
[disclosure: I mostly maintain CVSTrac]
c.
Log in or piss off.
Oh, I guess I missread, thanks for letting me know. In that case, I'd reccomend Mantis. You can directly integrate it into SVN if you want. Here's the tutorial I used to integrate them together
Would be nice if you could have stayed on topic.
"Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft
trac is not the best solution. Trac is a one-install per product gig.. not something that'll allow you to version and actually track issues across multiple products and multiple environments and multiple subversion repositories... all at once.
Also, the wiki isn't that good.. tons of other great options that are actually good to wiki on.
Jira has a great subversion connector... Jira has its quirks that I hate.... and I'd choose bugzilla if it weren't for a job.. but, honestly, the few thousand dollars jira is.. completely worth it.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
In all seriousness though, I've ditched svn for a DVCS (git) and I'll never go back. I used svn for maybe forty projects and loved every second of it until I used git for the first time (ok, it took a lot of reading to convince myself git was worth the time investment required to grok another VCS).
Branching in git is so unbelievably natural. I've got my bash set to add (working) to the end of my prompt if I'm in a git repo and I'm on the "working" branch, for instance.
I will say, the designers on my team dislike git significantly. Their lives were almost entirely covered with "svn co/ci" and the idea of having to keep a remote tracking branch, merge a work branch with it, push the changes to the master repo...this just irritates them. But once we find a good way to appease them, it will have been so unbelievably worthwhile.
Anyway, I do believe ease of forking/branching/merging to be the killer feature of a VCS and I think git has got it completely right. I've never tried mercurial (hg) but I've heard great things about it as well...but I have zero dissatisfaction with git, and a project I'm working on has even adopted the short-hash conventions git uses with much success.
Erm, enough.
-knewter
What in Mercurial makes it superior to git?
As a user of both, my conclusion is that git is comprehensively superior to Mercurial and Subversion. The basis of that conclusion includes:
I know I'm not answering your question, but you may be asking the wrong question. Subversion 1.5 "has" merge support, but you still can't do safe bi-directional merges. (Wherein you make a feature branch "foo", merge from trunk to foo, foo to trunk, trunk to foo, foo to trunk, etc.)
Also, you can't safely merge from branch to branch (merging from "foo" to your production "2.x" branch, without passing through trunk).
Here's the designer of SVN merge support discussing the problem:
http://subversion.tigris.org/servlets/ReadMsg?listName=dev&msgNo=127570
Unfortunately, if you want real merges in an open source project, you're stuck with the distributed source control systems like git, mercurial, darcs, etc. even if you don't need distributed features.
But you may come to like distributed source control (many people do)... they have tools like "ticgit" that you may like better than some of the other svn-based tools out there.
When I moderate, I only use "-1, Overrated". That way, I never get meta-moderated!
Bugzilla - Nice and lots of support, but the interface makes you want to kill yourself.
No it doesn't.
It makes me want to kill others. :)
You can use Bugzilla and Subversion using scmbug (http://freshmeat.net/projects/scmbug/). It's a set of scripts you use as svn hooks. Setting it up is not really user-friendly but once it's set, well... you don't have to touch it anymore.
You can solve a bug using the following comment on a svn commit:
bug 42: resolved fixed
blablablablah (real comment)...
BTW it works for other control and bug-tracking systems...
I am a satisfied user of TrackStudio from http://www.trackstudio.com/ Web-based, affordable, very configurable, and with an easy to configure integration with SVN. You can use most major databases for backend. You can model any number of workflows and have custom fields per workflow, per project or per user. Very effective searching and filtering allowing custom views. Email notification, Digests, RSS, etc. It also has an extensive SOAP interface if you need do some custom integration. It still is a bit weak on the report side, but the next major release give us a proper report designer. Most importantly, they have great support and are very receptive to your requirements, adding features that are frequently requested and of general interest. http://www.trackstudio.com/documentation/35/html/frames.html
Lars F.
http://search.cpan.org/dist/RT-Integration-SVN/