Skip to main content

How To Enjoy a Week of FogBugz

I have been on an eternal struggle to find the rights tools to keep me organized and on track with my projects. Flying blind is just not something I can do, with such a wandering mind. I especially like time tracking tools, because if I am tracking my time in a task, I am far more likely to focus on it until it is complete. Distractions make a lier out of me. When Joel Spolsky blogged about the Evidence-Based Scheduling in the newest release of his FogBugz product, I finally decided to try the service out for a new project I am starting on over the holiday. It has been about a week and I already have some really good impressions.

As far as bug tracking goes, FogBugz seems to be bare a good deal of similarities with Bugzilla, but is still very familiar to a Trac fan. They've even added a Wiki, although I've not used it. I'm working in solo on my FogBugz trial, right now. (More on that later.) I do wish for dependancy field on cases, instead of just linking to them in the comments. Overall I don't have many wishing for the case tracking itself, and I'm barely using the features available.

The listing is very customizable and I've taken advantage of a few different configurations already, so I can definitely see myself finding more that are useful. There have been some things I haven't found the right fit for. Notably, areas and releases have been a little awkward. Many things cross over different areas of work, so I don't have a clear separation there. I kind of wish for tags, instead. As for releases, there simply are not good uses for those when a project is so internal. I can just make a release for when we decided it is done, but then the field is as useful as not existing at all. I tried to make pseudo-releases for different milestones of functionality, but I am not sure if that is a proper fit.

Time tracking, the very thing that drove me to try FogBugz, is possibly my favorite part. Seeing what you guess and what you actually take is revealing. I seem to guess over, usually, but I wonder if I'll see my task estimates actually getting better as I use this over a period of time. The feedback may train me. I've even found, so far, that the release estimations seem to be pretty well calculated and I've hit the dates its estimated pretty well. I want to write more about my thoughts on estimation and how well you can estimate what you can't design until you've done much of the things you need to estimate in the first place.

I really am loving it, but I know I need to wait out my trial before making any final call. I think it is well worth the cost over the free Trac and others, even for personal use.
Labels:

Comments

Anonymous said…
If you plan to use FogBugz for personal projects, I would recommend going to Settings->Your FogBugz On Demand Account and switching to the "Student and Startup Edition". In that mode, you can use our hosted version of FogBugz for free indefinitely so long as you have only one or two users in your install.
10:08 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

My Software Job Transition Strategies?

I’ve been spending a good deal of the last two days preparing mentally for starting a whole new challenge as a developer. New things aren’t new to me, but this is different and big enough really call for some Deep Thoughts ™. For one thing, I’ve made a big move from the world of Python web development to totally other Python work and while web development has never been the only thing I do, it has been the only work that paid the bills. That transition isn’t one that bothers me or daunts me, though. Instead, I’m thinking about transitioning to the scope of the work I’m getting into. For a long time, I juggled multiple clients and client projects every day, so no single project usually took up most of my time. Every developer juggles time through the day, but exactly how that works in each company and on each project varies a lot. I was looking for a place that I could really focus in a way that I haven’t for a long time. I think I found that, but now I have to deal with the consequen...
Post a Comment
Read more

CARDIAC: The Cardboard Computer

I am just so excited about this. CARDIAC. The Cardboard Computer. How cool is that? This piece of history is amazing and better than that: it is extremely accessible. This fantastic design was built in 1969 by David Hagelbarger at Bell Labs to explain what computers were to those who would otherwise have no exposure to them. Miraculously, the CARDIAC (CARDboard Interactive Aid to Computation) was able to actually function as a slow and rudimentary computer.  One of the most fascinating aspects of this gem is that at the time of its publication the scope it was able to demonstrate was actually useful in explaining what a computer was. Could you imagine trying to explain computers today with anything close to the CARDIAC? It had 100 memory locations and only ten instructions. The memory held signed 3-digit numbers (-999 through 999) and instructions could be encoded such that the first digit was the instruction and the second two digits were the address of memory to operat...
1 comment
Read more

The Snake Pit is About to Burst

The signs are all over the place. I can count at least five implementations of Python today: CPython, CL-Python, Jython, IronPython, and PyPy. The use of the language is sky rocketting and set to grab real mind-share as the hype over Ruby subsides. Things are looking good for a favorite green snake and british comedy troop reference, aren't they? Trouble is on the horizon in the very ingredients that could push us into true success. Our community and our very language is in danger of segregation, unless we all do something about it and learn to get along. One of the most visible dangers (to me) is being ignored for various political, cultural, and non-technical reasons. IronPython's users are increasingly pushing IronPython-only recipes, libraries, and tutorials. No one is talking about the transition of the alternative implemenations to CPython 3.0 compatability. To make matters worse, we still can not define the language without refering to an implementation. This is very un...
11 comments
Read more