Am Samstag, 28. Juni 2008 11:13:20 schrieb Dennis Schridde: > Am Freitag, 27. Juni 2008 09:56:19 schrieb Per Inge Mathisen: > > On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 3:41 PM, Dennis Schridde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> I am quite sure we have discussed this before, and we made a decision > > >> that we should not put feature requests in the bug tracker, because > > >> this would fill up the bug tracker and make it harder to find and sort > > >> bugs. (And I hope you agree that fixing bugs is more important than > > >> adding features.) > > > > > > I think that is what priority:wish is for. :) You can iirc filter for > > > priority>wish > > > > But you cannot filter it away, at least not easily. So feature > > requests will pollute the bug list. That is unacceptable. We *need* to > > focus on clearing the bug list, and then it must be readily and easily > > available. Bugs must not be hidden among hundreds of feature requests. > > Bug reports are much more important than feature requests! > > > > > And yes, I agree that there should no feature request popup in the > > > bugtracker which are unrealistic. > > > Discuss with other users -> file a request. In that order. > > > There are also wrong or newbie bugreports, but the overall quality is > > > acceptable. I think if we can make the discuss-first-report-later > > > policy clear to the users, the same would work for feature requests. > > > > Who is going to tell people that their fancy, enthustiastic idea is > > stupid, and emphasize the point by rudely closing their feature > > request? It is either not going to happen, or it will take way too > > much developer time. > > > > Take the idea of limited ammo for all units. This was discussed > > extensively in connection with Watermelon's patch that implemented > > this feature. I am not sure if this was on the forums or on this list, > > or both. It was soundly rejected - yet it appears again as a feature > > request in the bug tracker. If we cannot simply close it because it is > > misplaced, we would have to restart a time consuming discussion about > > this feature in the bug tracker - a place hardly anybody reads. It is > > much better that such ideas are raised in the forums, and if there is > > agreement enough that this is a good idea, then a wiki page is started > > for it that sketches out how it can be implemented, and answers are > > worked out for the problems people see with it. This way also rejected > > ideas can be documented with reasons why - instead of being closed and > > buried in a tracker, which is in any case much harder to read. > > Sounds like a good proposal. The only thing I am interested in is that > a) Working (or maybe-working) ideas are not lost and > b) I do not have to a follow disccussion of a dozen features, just in case > one post out of a hundred might contain something that's worth thinking > about. (With the other ones, while not necessarily stupid, being nothing > I'd spend too much time on, or already being offtopic. Take the "wish list" > thread as an example: I did not read the first one fully and never looked > into the second one. 9 pages and growing, holy s*...) > > So we tell people to discuss ideas whereever, and when they agree with > eachother that they have a good proposal, they shall create a wiki page > describing the feature/change they want, also handling implications or > difficulties this might impose? > And we then go through that list some times, promoting those which we think > are good and implementable to the next stage? > > A wiki template might be a nice thing to provide a few (!) informations as > a header.
PS: Basically this is something like this, right? https://blueprints.launchpad.net/bzr PPS: I'd like to hear input from other people as well...
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
