Talk:Trac

message: Looks like someone has mistaken this disambiguation(?) page for an opportunity to advertise their product?  Not sure exactly what needs to be done here. Does anyone understand what the major Trac discussed here actually is? Jcsutton 00:50, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletion 

message: The article has no reference listed for the comment about Trac being used at Nasa. Anyone have a link to back up the statement? Jeremyh 02:26, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: http://trac.edgewall.org/wiki/TracUsers — RevRagnarok Talk Contrib 02:49, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  NASA 

message: I emailed the Trac people about using their logo (http://www.edgewall.org/gfx/trac_logo.png) in the article, but the file upload page and all of this mention of the GFDL scared me away. Can someone with more experience in this area tell me what to do?
--Mdkess 14:50, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Logo 

message: Trac interfaces with SVN only - there are [experimental] plugins for Git/Mercurial/Bazaar, but they do not come with Trac, so the statement is wrong?
--212.183.134.209 (talk)  —Preceding comment was added at 20:14, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  interface to version control systems? 

message: User:Renfeng recently added a self-created tutorial to the extlinks section and reverted its removal. This isn't an appropriate link for a number of reasons; it should go again. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 09:38, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, instead of just saying "a number of reasons," how about listing them, with reference to guidelines? Consider "self-promotion" moot, because I'm willing to add the link, absent objection. --Abd (talk) 13:36, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Wikipedia is not a manual, guidebook or textbook; External links must be to reliable sources. A tutorial written by an editor and then posted on a free web hosting service is neither of these. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 10:19, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inappropriate external links 

message: "Trac is reported to have more than 450 installations worldwide"
is a bit confusing, since it gives the impression that Trac is being reported to have been installed on 450 boxes worldwide, which is not the case.  Surely there are more, probably thousands or tens of thousands of installations being used but just not listed on that page.  Something along the following lines would better serve the reader:
"The Trac website lists over 450 users of the software, and <a note of how many more installations probably exist>."
If speculation on the popularity is not encyclopediaic, some download count figures could be thrown in?
82.130.24.223 (talk) 19:13, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds good to me. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 10:16, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adoption 

message: Could someone that runs TRAC, if possible please update the screenshot to the homepage of a clean TRAC install of the latest version. --Johanvanl (talk) 20:45, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Screenshot Update 

message: The infobox and tags claim the software was initially released in 2006. This contradicts the facts, the references and the article body; it was started in 2003 and the first release was in 2004. I fixed this but it was reverted without giving a reason. Why? Cgbuff (talk) 06:19, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Update it. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:07, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Release year 

message: It's important to mention that there are not just a few more plugins, but many hundreds of them.
It would then be quite natural to also include where those hundreds of plugins are.
But any mention of the Trac Hacks community website, the main place for hosting Trac plugins, gets reverted as spam.
That website is also mentioned in references like 12.
It seems absurd not to mention that website. What's the problem? Should those references be cited again? Cgbuff (talk) 06:19, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not important. If it were, there would be article about it not just mentions of it in other sources. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:06, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  It's not important on its own, but it's important in the context of Trac, so there are no articles about it on its own but articles about Trac mention it because that's the context where it's important. So while it should not have its own wikipedia page it should be mentioned in Trac's wikipedia page. Cgbuff (talk) 19:20, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  Right and it's used, as a :WP:PRIMARY source to support several of the hacks you've listed. Does it really need to discuss it? Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:06, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trac Hacks 

message: A project management software "... can manage estimation and planning, scheduling, cost control and budget management, resource allocation, collaboration software, communication, decision-making, quality management and documentation or administration systems."
I understand Trac is marketed as a tool with a "simple" approach to project management but I do not think its features can honor the previous statement (even in the most simplistic fashion). At least, it should NOT be mentioned in the introduction of the Trac article and the info box as a software of this category (I feel is somewhat misleading and there are software products with more of these features that do not try to pose at all as software project tools) but, the "simple" approach can me mentioned somewhere else to keep fanatics of Trac happy.
George Rodney Maruri Game (talk) 07:58, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree. Seems like trying to use Wikipedia to hype the product. Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:56, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Project Management? 

message: https://www.edgewall.org/ does not suggest this is a legal entity.
> edgewall.org is a place where a community of software developers collaborate on creating exciting open source software based on the Python programming language. It is best known for the popular web-based project management tool Trac.
Is it really an informal group of people? Or did I miss something? Dachary (talk) 07:50, 27 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edgewall Software, is it a legal entity?