diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'open_issues/issue_tracking.mdwn')
| -rw-r--r-- | open_issues/issue_tracking.mdwn | 78 |
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 |