On 11/18/2017 08:30 AM, Daniel Schürmann wrote:
Hi Be,
It is not fair to blame the infra structure, for the leak of time the
maintainers have to manage the different informations.
...
>
> The current fragmented infrastructure, has some drawbacks, but it has a
> very big advantage. You can join discussions how your time allows.
>
> @Be: I am really happy, that you are active on all channels, thank you
> very much!
> Unfortunately, I cannot do this because of leak of time. So I have
> decided not to join IRC and look to forums only when the time allows.
It's just as unreasonable to expect new contributors to sign up for 7
different accounts (GitHub, IRC, phpBB, Freenode, mailing list,
Launchpad, wiki) as it is to expect long time developers to pay
attention to all of them. It would be easier if there were less things
to pay attention to.
Launchpad looks somehow outdated, but the important features are there.
Looking dated is important. Newcomers are telling us in no uncertain
terms that they don't want to use Launchpad and by and large they
aren't. What features Launchpad has are irrelevant if people don't use them.
Especially, it shows possible duplicates when filing a bug, has more bug
states than just open and close, has blueprints as a second way to group
bugs in addition to milestones, the blueprints.
Can you elaborate on "has more bug states than just open and close"?
What else is needed? GitHub and GitLab both have project-defined tags
that can be used for further organization. GitLab allows projects to
define priorities for custom tags.
Blueprints are nice but not necessary. Again, tags can be used for the
same purpose.
If we assumed Launchpad is well managed (I am working on that now that I
have permission) it gives a well structured overview for users, what the
state of the project is. GitHub is more developers focused and does not
offer this clarity.
I don't know what you mean. GitLab has a nice dashboard view for its
issue tracker where you can filter by milestone and tag. You can
drag-and-drop between tags in this view to keep issues organized. I
think GitHub now has a similar capability too.
I am strictly against closing bugs, that are older then a certain
deadline, because that feels like a hit in the face, for the people
which may have investigated a significant time to file the bug. This
happens to me in other projects and I took my consequences.
I agree. Fedora does this and it does feel like a slap in the face. Only
bugs that are marked Incomplete should expire. Launchpad already does
this. It would help to automatically add a friendly message warning
about impending expiration and explaining that the issue can be reopened
in the future if the reporter provides the required information.
One of my biggest grievances with Launchpad is how the "Wishlist" marker
is mutually exclusive with a priority designation. To me it feels like a
slap in the face for a feature that's important to me to be designated
with the lowest priority level. IMO there is little practical difference
between a bug and the lack of a feature. Something that ought to get
done is something that ought to get done. Whether it's implementing a
useful feature or whether it's a bug doesn't matter for how important it is.
By the way, I have loosed long finished post more than once, because of
leak of internet connection.
Pressing "Submit" without a stable connection and you post is gone. So
that is really a field that could use an update.
This has happened to me with phpBB as well and it is frustrating.
Discourse can automatically save draft posts. We may also consider
opening a GitLab repository just for user support using GitLab's issue
tracker. Then it would be easy to move a user support question from the
user support repository to the main code repository's issue tracker
without having to ask the user to make a new account or duplicate what
they've already written.
I think it could be really helpful to make a GitLab repository for
controller mappings. We could use its issue tracker to take requests for
controller mappings so users could vote for mappings they want. That
would give us data on what hardware is important to map, which could
guide us on what to ask manufacturers for and/or what to spend donations on.
Email works very good here. I can manage my own priority list and can
reach everyone in just a second.
I fully understand Be's concerns, and I agree that GitLab looks very
mature.
So we are currently in this cycle:
* We want a integrated project management structure.
* We cannot leave GitHub because of the GitHub community
* We cannot move to Gitbub issues because they do not fit our
requirements and we loose the history.
The popularity of GitHub does give it an advantage, but I do not think
it is important enough that we can't leave GitHub. Please elaborate on
what you don't like about GitLab's issue tracker.
FWIW, GitLab allows importing from GitHub Issues. We could do a
roundabout import from Launchpad to GitHub then GitHub to GitLab.
https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/user/project/import/github.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Get Mixxx, the #1 Free MP3 DJ Mixing software Today
http://mixxx.org
Mixxx-devel mailing list
Mixxx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mixxx-devel
