I think the author is confused between "tracking bugs" and "a bug tracking system". The former is a social process, and something that all projects do on some level. The latter is a piece of software, which may or may not help the project to do the former. The author even discovered the evidence for this, but missed the meaning: git's bug work happens on the mailing list, while mono's goes on in the tracker.

Don't confuse software with problems. That's how we get bad software.

Does anybody else feel like a bug tracker has a negative impact on community and coding enjoyment? I don't think I'm on-board with this argument, or his assertion that significantly more people are using Mono than git.

I find bug trackers satisfying, generally, but then again, I make money from my software--it's almost entirely Open Source, but nonetheless, my prosperity depends on the software being great. Anyway, closing out bugs is an enjoyable part of the job, and I simply can't keep up with things that come in via email or in the forums. I think there's a volume-of-issues-to-developers mismatch between my projects (which have two or three developers, tops, plus a few occasional contributors) and something like git (which has a primary maintainer, a few regular developers, and dozens of occasional contributors).

Perhaps the reason Mono has no traffic on their mailing list is because Mono as a piece of software kind of sucks, at least in my opinion. Then again my perception might just be colored by my experience with using OpenEmbedded which I've come to dislike greatly and coincidentally also uses Mono.

False. Trac has a git plugin. Ergo, Git has an excellent bug tracker available for anyone who wants to use it.

Or there's Lighthouse.