7 ms·
> why not issues/tickets as a code also? This means that to let, e.g., testers add information to a ticket they have to do a code commit? I doubt they want to
by b3morales 5y ago
> why not issues/tickets as a code also?
This means that to let, e.g., testers add information to a ticket they have to do a code commit? I doubt they want to deal with that, and I don't particularly want to extend commit access to my repo to everyone who might need to interact with an issue.
- cdcarter 5y agoGithub (and plenty of other solutions) provide "edit in browser" capabilities. One could even imagine a custom web front end that enumerates the tickets, allows search, has a new/edit form that does a commit behind the scenes, etc... Fossil SCM has all of the ticketing/bugs stored in the source control repo. Of course, in this case the repo is a SQLite database.
- b3morales 5y agoI still don't think I want those in the repo history, and (for a public repo) this opens up a security hole, letting arbitrary people write directly to code files. I'm not familiar at all with Fossil; perhaps its design makes this possible in a way that doesn't work so well with Git.
- sedatk 5y agoThat's an important point. Not everyone who processes the tickets need to access the code, let alone change it.