[rt-users] RT for bug tracking?

[Eric Siegerman]

Hi.

I'm evaluating bug-tracking systems, and wondering whether people
use RT for that, as opposed to the trouble ticketing that appears
to be its primary focus.

To be honest, I'm not entirely clear on the difference, except
that in Linas Vepstas's taxonomy (http://linas.org/linux/pm.html),
bug tracking systems:
 (1) have more roles, states, etc.
 (2) enforce workflow (only some transitions are allowed)
 (3) can integrate with source-control systems

Well:
 (1) Seems easily hackable
 (2) Seems counterproductive, at least in a small shop like ours.
     I've read, and it makes sense, that if a system tries to
     enforce a particular workflow, the real world never quite
     matches the ideal, and so users have to work around the
     system -- or worse yet, they give up on it completely
 (3) Doesn't seem to be of great interest here

And on my requirements spreadsheet, RT gets an awful lot of
"yes"'s :-)

So, I guess my question really is, what is it about RT that makes
it *less* suitable for bug tracking than are things that bill
themselves as "bug tracking systems"?

Thanks much.

--

|  | /\
|-_|/  >   Eric Siegerman, Toronto, Ont.        erics at telepres.com
|  |  /
When I came back around from the dark side, there in front of me would
be the landing area where the crew was, and the Earth, all in the view
of my window. I couldn't help but think that there in front of me was
all of humanity, except me.
	- Michael Collins, Apollo 11 Command Module Pilot