From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8339 invoked by alias); 18 Nov 2001 20:41:06 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 8285 invoked from network); 18 Nov 2001 20:41:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lilac.csi.cam.ac.uk) (131.111.8.44) by sourceware.cygnus.com with SMTP; 18 Nov 2001 20:41:00 -0000 Received: from student.cusu.cam.ac.uk ([131.111.179.82] helo=kern.srcf.societies.cam.ac.uk ident=mail) by lilac.csi.cam.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.22 #1) id 165YkL-0000lo-00; Sun, 18 Nov 2001 20:40:57 +0000 Received: from jsm28 (helo=localhost) by kern.srcf.societies.cam.ac.uk with local-esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 165YkL-0001tG-00; Sun, 18 Nov 2001 20:40:57 +0000 Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2001 04:17:00 -0000 From: "Joseph S. Myers" X-X-Sender: To: Jakub Jelinek cc: Subject: Re: Using GNATS to track GCC patches In-Reply-To: <20011118212937.B543@sunsite.ms.mff.cuni.cz> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-SW-Source: 2001-11/txt/msg00335.txt.bz2 On Sun, 18 Nov 2001, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > BTW: What's the reason why bugzilla isn't used instead? GNATS doesn't work What was the status of bugzilla on 24 Aug 1999 (the date the GCC GNATS database started)? > at all with some browsers and I wonder what advantages does it give over > bugzilla. Is it just political issue? How does bugzilla compare to the wishlist I sent in ? Advocates of other bug tracking systems can answer for the ones they prefer. No-one on gnats-devel answered as to how GNATS 4 compares. -- Joseph S. Myers jsm28@cam.ac.uk