3 ms·

The primary issue is the cost of switching, and Waffle was actually very good at this. It was basically just a front-end for GitHub Issues. I always knew that

by ken 8y ago

The primary issue is the cost of switching, and Waffle was actually very good at this. It was basically just a front-end for GitHub Issues. I always knew that if at any point Waffle shut down, I'd be no worse off than before I started using them, and I'd still have all my data. I'm actually much more concerned about GitHub itself. I still haven't found a good way to back up my Issues. They used to point to joeyh's Haskell program, which is neat but has many severe limitations (like: doesn't support private repos at all). Their current recommendation seems to be a third-party service called "BackHub", whose cheapest plan is more expensive than GitHub Pro.

JMTQp8lwXL 8y ago
Maybe issues should just be built into Git itself. Can't really imagine software development without them.
- xkcd-sucks 8y ago
  If you track issues in a text file, sqlite DB etc -- they already are in git. (But I've never seem anyone do this)
  - ken 8y ago
    SQLite files can't easily be merged. Putting one database in another database doesn't allow you to take advantage of the best features of either one. Text files are a good idea, and I've done that for many of my own projects. You just need to figure out a filename scheme, and a file format (JSON? YAML?). It's great to be able to atomically commit a fix to the source code, and also close the bug report. I'm not sure how well it would scale. (Mozilla has 1.5M bug reports in their Bugzilla!) At the least, you'd need a local client that could index the text files into a format more suitable for sorting/searching. It would only need to download the diffs, though.
    - xkcd-sucks 8y ago
      Oh oops, there already exist bug trackers for a few decades :) Take your favorite bug tracker and put its offline storage into a git submodule?? I imagine they are all better than GitHub issues which are literally just a forum of threads

by ken 8y ago

JMTQp8lwXL 8y ago

Maybe issues should just be built into Git itself. Can't really imagine software development without them.

xkcd-sucks 8y ago
If you track issues in a text file, sqlite DB etc -- they already are in git. (But I've never seem anyone do this)
- ken 8y ago
  SQLite files can't easily be merged. Putting one database in another database doesn't allow you to take advantage of the best features of either one. Text files are a good idea, and I've done that for many of my own projects. You just need to figure out a filename scheme, and a file format (JSON? YAML?). It's great to be able to atomically commit a fix to the source code, and also close the bug report. I'm not sure how well it would scale. (Mozilla has 1.5M bug reports in their Bugzilla!) At the least, you'd need a local client that could index the text files into a format more suitable for sorting/searching. It would only need to download the diffs, though.
  - xkcd-sucks 8y ago
    Oh oops, there already exist bug trackers for a few decades :) Take your favorite bug tracker and put its offline storage into a git submodule?? I imagine they are all better than GitHub issues which are literally just a forum of threads