[Freeciv-Dev] Re: bugs and todo

[Jason Short <jdorje@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Per I Mathisen wrote:
> On Sun, 2 Jun 2002, Raimar Falke wrote:
> > These files act as a kind of
> > preprocessing. So that the problem is expressed in a language that the
> > a freeciv developer understands.
>
> Yes, and I believe Jitterbug is a lot better "preprocessor" than cvs files
> or a static web page, because it is dynamic and holds the discussion
> ensuing after a wishlist item/bug is posted.
There are at least two drawbacks, though.

One, Jitterbug is not editable.  Information just gets added and added 
to a bug report until eventually it is fixed and closed.  Using the 
information in Jitterbug as a prototype for writing the BUGS file is a 
very good thing, but you could take this information and write a far 
more concise summary for BUGS than Jitterbug provides.
Two (and this is, IMO, the kicker), Jitterbug is dynamic and always 
changing.  If the release for 1.13 points to Jitterbug for the entries, 
the bug listing will always be for current CVS rather than for 1.13.  It 
will therefore become much less useful as time goes by.
jason