On Friday 30 October 2009 17:10:02 Zero3 wrote: > Matthew Toseland wrote: > > We need to migrate the Wikka wiki to MediaWiki, because the latter is > > standard and we will be able to host it externally. E.g. sourceforge Hosted > > Apps allows for data import for MediaWiki. > > The wiki isn't really kept enough up-to-date, is it? I personally think > the idea of something more integrated (like Trac) would be awesome. > MediaWiki seems a bit over-do for Freenet? > > > BUG TRACKER: > > - Dev intelligence i.e. stuff people have said. If these are corroborated > > quickly they should be acted upon, else they should be closed. > > Something integrated (same user account, for starters) might help > motivating people to put this stuff in the wiki as well.
I agree it would help, but maybe not by very much? It would however make it a lot more readable. > > > If we keep the bug tracker: > > - We need to find somewhere to host MANTIS. Probably we will have to pay > > for this. > > - We need to keep it up to date ourselves, which is somewhat involved. It > > may not be as bad as nextgens implies though. > > - Minimum immediate work. > > I personally think Mantis is *very* bad usability-wise. Trac, Launchpad, > and many other bug trackers are much easier to use. If we even have to > pay just to keep that thing running, I'd say find something else. Is Trac easy enough *for end-users*? > > > If we don't keep the bug tracker: > > - We can use any hosted bug tracker anywhere. E.g. Sourceforge Hosted Apps > > includes both Mantis and Trac. We will likely be able to avoid any fixed > > monthly payments. > > - We can use any bug tracker: Mantis, Trac, etc. See below. > > - We will need to do a "spring clean": Keep the current bug tracker up for > > a while but read-only, *manually* migrate any important bugs and issues to > > the new tracker. > > - This will be significant work. > > - It will involve going over the bugs, dumping those which are out of date, > > abandoned etc, and rewriting those bugs and feature issues that are still > > valid. Trac's wiki functionality may be useful for this, although it loses > > the ability to link bugs formally. > > - It may be a useful exercise in terms of prioritising and de-junking. > > > > However, we have 20 weeks left of funding, so we have to ask whether > > spending a week de-junking is worth it? > > If it comes down to costing us ?40-?80 per month... It quickly runs up. > I'm up for giving a hand and doing 5 'a day of the de-junking and > moving. I'm sure there are more people around willing to give a hand. That would be helpful yeah. I can then subscribe to some sort of feed and review rather than having to do everything myself. :) > > > An important related point: Relatively few end-users use the current bug > > tracker. It is on the Contribute menu on the website, but the main reason > > IMHO is it is not very newbie friendly. Uservoice is a reasonable solution > > for end-user feature suggestions and gauging public opinion, but because it > > does not force users to register their email addresses, it is worthless for > > solving individual reproducible bugs. It might reasonably be argued that we > > should have a separate issue tracker or forums system for end-user bug > > reports. Also, it may make sense for the developer-oriented bug tracker to > > be open source, whereas it matters less for the end-user tracker, because > > 1) end-users care less, and 2) long term stuff with detailed implementation > > notes is likely to be on the developer-oriented bug tracker. > > Again, let's find something more user-friendly than Mantis :/ > > > If this line of reasoning is correct, we need to choose an > > end-user-oriented issue tracker or forums system (either way ideally gratis > > and hosted) to complement Uservoice. Suggestions? > > It would make sense to find a tracker that both users and devs can use. > Saves the overhead of moving things from e.g. a forums system to a bug > tracker. Is it possible? Is Trac something that end users can use? -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 835 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part. URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20091030/9d37dcd7/attachment.pgp>
