I'm probably over-simplifying, but it seems that the big problem is the issue tracker. Email is a standard (lots of standards) with standard tools. git is a near-standard which could use better support, but works well. Issue trackers are .... a mess.
That sample work-flow shouldn't require a switch to a web browser. The dev should be able to reply to the email and the reply should be fully authenticated and allow 'mark as duplicate' etc. All relevant info should be in the local email archive and the local git archive, both of which should be linked from the email in an 'obvious' way.
Once we had a sensible distributed federated issue tracker, the rest would just follow naturally, wouldn't it?
Is this jus about issue trackers.
Email is a standard (lots of standards) with standard tools.
git is a near-standard which could use better support, but works well.
Issue trackers are .... a mess.
That sample work-flow shouldn't require a switch to a web browser. The dev should be able to reply to the email and the reply should be fully authenticated and allow 'mark as duplicate' etc. All relevant info should be in the local email archive and the local git archive, both of which should be linked from the email in an 'obvious' way.
Once we had a sensible distributed federated issue tracker, the rest would just follow naturally, wouldn't it?
- NeilBrown