From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Takashi Iwai Subject: Re: bug tracking? Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 11:37:49 +0200 Sender: alsa-devel-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.4 - "Hosorogi") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Return-path: Received: from Cantor.suse.de (ns.suse.de [213.95.15.193]) by alsa.alsa-project.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/SuSE Linux 8.9.3-0.1) with ESMTP id LAA18218 for ; Thu, 15 May 2003 11:46:45 +0200 In-Reply-To: Errors-To: alsa-devel-admin@lists.sourceforge.net List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: To: Jaroslav Kysela Cc: Patrick Shirkey , ALSA development List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org At Thu, 15 May 2003 11:21:37 +0200 (CEST), Jaroslav wrote: > > On Thu, 15 May 2003, Takashi Iwai wrote: > > > > Maybe that should be my next addition to the ALSA website. I get a lot > > > of bug reports through the docs page and it makes sense to reuse that > > > code for a bug reporting system. > > > > > > Maybe it will have more psychological impact if it is hosted by ALSA > > > instead of sf.net (which seems to always have something wrong with it > > > anyway). > > > > it would be really appreciated. > > i personally dislike the current sf's bug-reporting system. > > The question is, if we have power to maintain such large bug reports. > From my experience, it works only few weeks until the system has many > unresolved reports. Then the database gets filled and only some bugs are > solved when our time permits. Also, when the database is large, it is > a bit problematic to mark solved reports (especially old ones). that's true. i think the current sf system has the following problems. - poor resolution of bugs for example, in the case of bugzilla, we can mark the items in better way: if you want to leave it, you can set LATER, WORKSFORME or REMIND. also, many of bug reports may be marked as DUPLICATED. - restricted (re)assignment if a bug is assigned to another person, you cannot resolve it. - no structured view (classification) all the bugs are listed in a flat list. too difficult to find a single bug. - no mail communications only the web is access to the system. - no template for necessary information e.g. alsa version, driver, chip/board name/model, output of lspci output of proc files, etc. also, a moderator person would be helpful in addition to the automatic assignment according to the given driver/function. another interesting idea is to have a "tester" list for each driver. when a bug report which is specific to a driver comes, it's delivered to all testers (and the maintainer) of the driver, so that they can check and follow up whether it works for them. > I also think that we should definitely create a document what users should > describe to avoid many communication handshakes with the bug reporter. providing a template would help for such a case, i believe. Takashi ------------------------------------------------------- Enterprise Linux Forum Conference & Expo, June 4-6, 2003, Santa Clara The only event dedicated to issues related to Linux enterprise solutions www.enterpriselinuxforum.com