FYI: 
http://blogs.gnome.org/newren/2009/01/03/gnome-dvcs-survey-results/
--- Vladimir
on 01/04/2009 02:33 AM Stephen J. Turnbull said the following:
 Vladimir G. Ivanovic writes:
  > on 01/01/2009 01:06 AM Stephen J. Turnbull said the following:
  > > Vladimir G. Ivanovic writes:
  > > 
  > >  > I wish that the XEmacs development team had chosen a more integrated
  > >  > system, one that included bug tracking, feature tracking, test cases,
  > >  > development work, etc.
  > > 
  > > Like which one?
  > 
  > In no particular order and with no claim of being any where near
  > exhaustive:
 
 Rather than responding to individual candidates, let me say that I
 don't see much integration in any of them, except in a very
 superficial sense of being able to search the bug/feature/commit
 databases simultaneously with one query.  We have a bug/feature
 attribute in our issue tracker; which ones have more than that
 (admittedly on a larger scale)?  That's why a number of projects I'd
 like to consider peers (but I fear I'm overreaching) like Python and
 Mailman have moved *away* from SourceForge.  There are some
 interesting new options like GitHub and Launchpad, but it's not clear
 to me how the XEmacs project could take advantage of them.
 
 You point to the development model.  Well, it's true that our
 development model would not be acceptable in business, but it's not so
 different from many other successful medium-sized projects such as
 Python or Ruby that I can see.  It's not clear that it can be
 otherwise when we depend on volunteer labor.  Face it, unlike the
 "large OSS projects" you mention it's been 15 years since XEmacs has
 been a mission-critical component of anybody's business model.
 Introducing things like agile programming or a "no docs, no tests: no
 commit" policy just aren't affordable.
 
 But without a better (which IMO includes "more formal") process, I
 don't see what integration buys us.  So adding the ITS is ad hoc, and
 needed to be done as cheaply as possible, especially with regard to
 ongoing maintenance.
 
 We also need more activity from the developers we've got, and more
 developers would be nice too.  I don't see how moving to one of the
 development hosting services would connect to more activity, while it
 would soak up effort from some of the active people we do have.
 
 How would you personally use such a facility to contribute to XEmacs?
  
-- 
Vladimir G. Ivanovic
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://calypso.tux.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta