[slime-devel] Bugtracker for Slime

Mark Evenson evenson at panix.com
Fri Aug 27 06:57:04 UTC 2010

On 8/23/10 10:36 PM, Tobias C Rittweiler wrote:
> In article<m2vd741ijk.fsf at common-lisp.net>,
>   Helmut Eller<heller at common-lisp.net>  wrote:


>>> What are your thoughts on that matter?
>> Trac also seems an option to consider; least that's available on cl.net.
>> It seems to work to well for Clozure.  They use SVN which has some
>> synergies with Trac but I guess having a Wiki and bug tracker at the
>> same place also a good thing.
> My experience with Trac so far is that it tends to be noticably
> (euphemism for annoyingly) slow. Especially on c-l.net.


For [ABCL][1], Erik changed the default common-lisp.net configuration to 
use a FCGI connection between Apache httpd and a long-running Python 
process for the tracd. This has sped up Trac to acceptable levels. 
Presumably, he (we?) can share configuration details for interested parties.

[1]: http://trac.common-lisp.net/armedbear/wiki

The downside to Trac as possible on common-lisp.net is that only 
committers can add bug reports, provide comments, etc.  as there are 
only notions of "users with a common-lisp.net uid" and "anonymous" for 
HTTP users.  Something like Launchpad effectively subcontracts out the 
operational aspects of dealing with a large, untrusted, and varying user 

In the hg v. git argument, I definitely prefer hg.  It has consistent 
documentation and design, making much more sense than git ever did for 
me.  When forced to use git for projects like ASDF even though I am a 
seasoned hg user for which DVC concepts are second nature, I am 
consistently frustrated at trying to figure out the corresponding 
commands in git.

"A screaming comes across the sky.  It has happened before, but there
is nothing to compare to it now."

More information about the slime-devel mailing list