# Mantis vs. Github tickets? **URL:** \ **Category:** Community\ **Created:** [November 19, 2017, 1:38pm UTC](https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/mantis-vs-github-tickets/1151 "2017-11-19T13:38:17Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 15\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![perry](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discuss.ocaml.org/perry/32/518_2.png) [@perry](https://discuss.ocaml.org/u/perry)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2017, 1:38pm UTC](https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/mantis-vs-github-tickets/1151/1 "2017-11-19T13:38:17Z")
I’m a bit confused about the distinction between the tickets that are kept in Mantis and the ones kept on Github. Why are issues put on the one vs. the other? ---
**Author:** ![Drup](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discuss.ocaml.org/drup/32/35_2.png) [@Drup](https://discuss.ocaml.org/u/Drup)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2017, 4:20pm UTC](https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/mantis-vs-github-tickets/1151/2 "2017-11-19T16:20:07Z")
The answer is simply that the OCaml project used Mantis a looong time before github, hence mantis contains all the bug reports and the core team, understandaly, doesn’t want to go through the pain of migrating. The current situation is that _bug reports_ are on Mantis and _patch proposals_ are (usually) on github. ---
**Author:** ![perry](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discuss.ocaml.org/perry/32/518_2.png) [@perry](https://discuss.ocaml.org/u/perry)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2017, 6:21pm UTC](https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/mantis-vs-github-tickets/1151/3 "2017-11-19T18:21:52Z")
> [@Drup](#): > > The current situation is that bug reports are on Mantis and patch proposals are (usually) on github. Cool. Is that separation intended to continue going forward? (In which case, I had better get a Mantis account if I want to file bug reports…) ---
**Author:** ![octachron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/49beb7/32.png) [@octachron](https://discuss.ocaml.org/u/octachron)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2017, 6:34pm UTC](https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/mantis-vs-github-tickets/1151/4 "2017-11-19T18:34:36Z")
> [@perry](#): > > Is that separation intended to continue going forward? Yes, there are currently no planned changes on this side . ---
**Author:** ![perry](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discuss.ocaml.org/perry/32/518_2.png) [@perry](https://discuss.ocaml.org/u/perry)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2017, 6:44pm UTC](https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/mantis-vs-github-tickets/1151/5 "2017-11-19T18:44:10Z")
Cool, so in response, I just got a Mantis account. ---
**Author:** ![dbuenzli](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discuss.ocaml.org/dbuenzli/32/18_2.png) [@dbuenzli](https://discuss.ocaml.org/u/dbuenzli)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2017, 6:46pm UTC](https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/mantis-vs-github-tickets/1151/6 "2017-11-19T18:46:11Z")
@octachron since you seem to be in the know. Is upgrading the system to the latest version of mantis being considered ? It would at least allow people to login with their github user account. ---
**Author:** ![perry](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discuss.ocaml.org/perry/32/518_2.png) [@perry](https://discuss.ocaml.org/u/perry)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2017, 6:49pm UTC](https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/mantis-vs-github-tickets/1151/7 "2017-11-19T18:49:03Z")
Fewer accounts to manage is better. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![octachron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/49beb7/32.png) [@octachron](https://discuss.ocaml.org/u/octachron)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2017, 7:41pm UTC](https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/mantis-vs-github-tickets/1151/8 "2017-11-19T19:41:47Z")
@dbuenzli, I have no idea; @gasche may know. ---
**Author:** ![gasche](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discuss.ocaml.org/gasche/32/4_2.png) [@gasche](https://discuss.ocaml.org/u/gasche)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2017, 8:03pm UTC](https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/mantis-vs-github-tickets/1151/9 "2017-11-19T20:03:11Z")
I don’t know either, but we can ask. It’s a matter of convincing people that the work (and risk) of doing the migration is offset by the advantages of the newer version – and of finding someone willing to do the work. ---
**Author:** ![gasche](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discuss.ocaml.org/gasche/32/4_2.png) [@gasche](https://discuss.ocaml.org/u/gasche)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2017, 8:04pm UTC](https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/mantis-vs-github-tickets/1151/10 "2017-11-19T20:04:03Z")
@dbuenzli, do you have a reference for the fact that recent Mantis versions interact better with Github, a link I can give in a discussion? (“Daniel said so” already works pretty well for OCaml development, but stilll.) ---
**Author:** ![dbuenzli](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discuss.ocaml.org/dbuenzli/32/18_2.png) [@dbuenzli](https://discuss.ocaml.org/u/dbuenzli)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2017, 8:32pm UTC](https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/mantis-vs-github-tickets/1151/11 "2017-11-19T20:32:12Z")
Actually sorry I found the discussion where we mentioned this a few month ago and I wrote: ``` What I would have liked is login with gh but it doesn’t seem to be the case ``` In any case the latest version of the software is available [here](https://www.mantisbt.org). It’s a bit unclear whether it would be an improvement to upgrade to the latest version (fancy stuff like markdown support is however [provided](https://www.mantisbt.org/bugs/view.php?id=17920) nowadays) ---
**Author:** ![dbuenzli](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discuss.ocaml.org/dbuenzli/32/18_2.png) [@dbuenzli](https://discuss.ocaml.org/u/dbuenzli)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2017, 8:37pm UTC](https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/mantis-vs-github-tickets/1151/12 "2017-11-19T20:37:33Z")
Apparently OpenID support is tracked [here](https://www.mantisbt.org/bugs/view.php?id=8199) but not implemented. ---
**Author:** ![anon72795300](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/8e7dd6/32.png) [@anon72795300](https://discuss.ocaml.org/u/anon72795300)\ **Post date:** [November 20, 2017, 10:07am UTC](https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/mantis-vs-github-tickets/1151/13 "2017-11-20T10:07:52Z")
Whilst this has come up, note that Github is dominating open-source projects and developers at the expense of diversity and flexibility. It’s gone from being the de-facto place, fine, to as if it is the _only_ service, which is not fine. And it’s not like the are a non-for-profit charity. It’s been a few times now that I’ve noticed hesitation from developers to engage with a project that is not Github. Just food for thought. ---
**Author:** ![mars0i](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discuss.ocaml.org/mars0i/32/1058_2.png) [@mars0i](https://discuss.ocaml.org/u/mars0i)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2017, 2:24pm UTC](https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/mantis-vs-github-tickets/1151/14 "2017-11-21T14:24:07Z")
fwiw Clojure uses Atlassian’s JIRA for tickets, although the source is available on github. When I used the Clojure ticket system, I found it awkward at first, but in the end I felt that the github ticket system would have been unwieldy for a project like Clojure/Clojurescript/ClojureCLR. I always assumed that JIRA costs real money, though, unless there’s a special discount version. Clojure is run by Cognitech, which presumably is profitable. ---
**Author:** ![gasche](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discuss.ocaml.org/gasche/32/4_2.png) [@gasche](https://discuss.ocaml.org/u/gasche)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2017, 8:55am UTC](https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/mantis-vs-github-tickets/1151/15 "2017-11-24T08:55:29Z")
The OCaml developers have already changed bugtrackers once or twice and they don’t seem excited – at all – by the idea of doing it again. My guess is that it will remain Mantis (which is doing a decent job) for the foreseeable future.