A forum for technical support discussion related to Fogbugz.
I've been looking at Fogbugz as a possible solution for our Portfolio/Project management needs.
Having a Hierarchy - I looked and saw many requests for this in archived topics - would be a huge benefit. I understand that cases can be linked but that seems incredibly tedious compared to opening a Parent to contain the effort and then opening N tasks within that parent, some of which might be broken down further. The argumseent seems to be that it would be more complex, but I don't buy that in a world where everybody navigates a hierarchical file system. I am old enough to remember when that was somewhat controversial - at least among the mainframe guys. Anyway, make a feature that people can toggle, if you must.
The other thing is case specific, and linked wiki articles. So I could, upon opening a new case, create a wiki article(s) that would forever be associated with that case. Any subordinate case - see how I just know you're gonna give me a hierarchy - would also include a link to the articles. That would allow me to put all my requirements and design documents in the case, editable and tracked. Subordinate cases could optionally have their own articles which would also be linked from their parents. Basically each case would have links to any articles in a direct line above or below; but not its sibling cases.
Last but not least both you guys and Accurev claim to be easy to integrate with but there's not an existing integration... Prove to me how easy it is by providing one soon :-)
Friday, December 12, 2008
Having now read all of the documentation for Fogbugz I am going to maintain an open mind about both hierarchies and wiki relations.
Not the Accurev integration though, because I need super great merge support.
Saturday, December 13, 2008
Notice that the world is moving *away* from hierarchical subdivisions. Yahoo used to hold bookmarks into hierarchical groups; now you just search. Bookmarks can be organized hierarchically, but most modern bookmarking engines use tags and searches (see delicious and many others). Filesystem are hierarchical... and then you get Spotlight or Google Desktop to search all your disk among e-mails, documents, etc. You get Picasa or F-Spot to organize your images by tags, dates, and other more useful multiple subdivisions. GMail uses tags for e-mails instead of hierarchy of folders. The list can continue forever.
We added a custom field to FogBugz called "tags" where people can put free words in there, and then we use an axis to search among the tags. This way, you can tag all bugs related to a certain feature with that feature's name and then just search for it (and save your search for later). We find it flexible enough not to need hierarchical divisions. Try it yourself.
(I'm just thinking about FogBugz, not a real user yet.)
I'm trying to capture a medium-size project design in my demo account. This is from a perspective of a new project; no work has been done on it yet. I have this kind of traditional work breakdown structure:
How can I categorize all the individual tasks in each of these categories? Do I need to make each one into an Area (i.e. Planning.Spec.Compiler) and then add tasks to that area? Will the Areas roll-up the estimates via EBS? This seems to violate the "Don't create too many areas" note in the doc.
This topic is archived. No further replies will be accepted.Other recent topics