IRC.

1 files changed, 78 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/open_issues/issue_tracking.mdwn b/open_issues/issue_tracking.mdwn
index 55c7b87b..72bb3b77 100644
--- a/open_issues/issue_tracking.mdwn
+++ b/open_issues/issue_tracking.mdwn
@@ -102,6 +102,84 @@ IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2011-08-31:
     <mattl> RT is not the easiest thing to set up, but works pretty well once
       it's running.
 
+IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2011-10-19:
+
+    <antrik> tschwinge: BTW, what happened to the plan of killing help-hurd?
+    <antrik> (and possibly some other lists)
+    <tschwinge> antrik: That plan got stalled, obviously.  ;-)
+    <tschwinge> antrik: Now, I had proposed to use hurd-dev for development,
+      and turn bug-hurd into a debbugs bug reportling list.  That proposal has
+      not heard any supportive/unsupportive votes yet.
+    <tschwinge> hurd-devel.  That's the name.
+    <tschwinge> And turn off hurd-devel-readers.  And turn off help-hurd.
+    <tschwinge> And web-hurd.
+    <tschwinge> Keep l4-hurd.
+    <antrik> yeah, I haven't replied regarding bug-hurd vs. hurd-devel, as I'm
+      not quite sure myself
+    <antrik> on one hand, a dedicated bug list can be convenient; on the other
+      hand, this kind of splits always causes unnecessary overhead IMHO
+    <antrik> also, hurd-devel would obviously be *only* for development, so in
+      this scenario we actually would *need* to keep something like help-hurd
+      as well...
+    <antrik> I think I'd prefer the non-exclusive mode for debbugs... would
+      have to check again how it works exactly though :-)
+    <tschwinge> antrik: I quite liked that exclusive mode for it automatically
+      archives discussions grouped by threads for easy reference.
+    <tschwinge> antrik: And, the very most of bug-hurd emails are ``issues'' of
+      some sort: bug report, patch (that needs to be tracked until it is
+      applied, etc.
+    <antrik> tschwinge: exclusive mode would just mean that people would take
+      most of these discussion elsewhere, and the bug list would only be used
+      when someone explicitly wants something tracked as a bug...
+    <antrik> ideally, the bug tracker should only track things if explicitly
+      CCed. ideally, it should be possible to forward mails that have been
+      posted without CC, so they can be tracked retroactively...
+    <tschwinge> antrik: Why do you think that people would take discussions
+      elsewhere?
+    <antrik> because most people don't consider it useful to put every random
+      question or remark in an issue tracker
+    <antrik> IMHO it should be easy to turn messages into tickets/followups;
+      but it should not happen automatically
+    <tschwinge> What if people wouldn't even notice that their issues is kept
+      in a tracker, too?
+    <draculus> It might send a notification of some sort?
+    <antrik> I once posted to a list with RT in exclusive mode, and quite
+      frankly, I considered it rather strange to get a ticket created for my
+      message :-)
+    <antrik> tschwinge: that would only be useful if you always close tickets
+      for irrelevant or finished discussions, mark duplicates etc. -- and this
+      would have to happen silently, without noise for most other people
+      following the list...
+    <antrik> tschwinge: are you sure you want to do that?... :-)
+    <tschwinge> Yes.
+    <tschwinge> Because that way we don't lose so much stuff as we currently
+      do.
+    <antrik> well, the decision is up to you in that case...
+    <tschwinge> In fact, probably less than manually archiving the content, as
+      I'm doing now, partially.
+    <tschwinge> antrik: Well, I'm just out for getting some comments.
+    <antrik> it would further reduce our bus factor though :-(
+    <tschwinge> That already is low enough that it doesn't matter anymore...
+    <tschwinge> antrik: So, to sum up, you'd use non-exclusive mode, but are
+      not actively opposed to exclusive mode as long as it doesn't too much
+      disturbe any procedures you're currently using?
+    <antrik> well, if it happens mostly in the background, I don't see why
+      anyone should be opposed...
+    <antrik> just make sure people posting to the list don't get a "ticket
+      created" message in response :-)
+    <antrik> it would make it harder though for people to explicitly track
+      issue they are interested in I fear
+    <antrik> when using non-exclusive mode, and people explicitly CC things to
+      the tracker, which sends a notice about a ticket being created, everyone
+      sees that and can act accordingly. if everything happens in the
+      background, few people would even think about it...
+    <antrik> so non-exclusive mode probably needs more effort to keep in order;
+      but it would be more useful too...
+    <tschwinge> Well, but with exclusive mode, people don't lose anything
+      compared to the current state, do they?
+    <antrik> tschwinge: probably not compared to the current state... but
+      possibly compared to a well-used non-exclusive mode :-)
+
 
 # Further Systems