On 3/20/07, Tom Spear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 3/20/07, Jan Zerebecki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yea it would be good to collect information on winehq.org and not
> scatter it all over the web. I think there are all the (web)tools
> on winehq.org one needs for that, or is anyone missing something?
> (Other than that the bugzilla could really use an upgrade.)
>
> Bugzilla queries are just a URL and it remains valid. So there is
> not much advantage to having a bug, right? But using components
> and keywords (in newer bugzillas there are even more ways to
> classify bugs) has the advantage that a change only triggers one
> change-mail. If the current components are not fain grained
> enough, we can always add more (and change the current ones).
>
> BTW. I think the current component descriptions need to be
> enhanced, we should at least assign each .dll to one component
> (would make it much more obvious what should go where).
>
I tend to agree on both parts. Bugzilla does need an upgrade, but the
problems are that we have no test server to make sure it will go
without hiccups, at least not to my knowledge, and that with the last
upgrade wiping out 3/4 of the tables of the bug comments, Jeremy is a
bit wary of fixing something that isnt 100% broken, which I don't
blame him for.
However, the components could use a major revamping and should be
fairly trivial. However I think that one component for each dll might
be a bit much.. Maybe narrow the dll's down to categories such as
wine-common-controls, and wine-riched..
No, we had vague components before, and they're not useful. We need a
component per dll. I don't think we should add them all right now,
but when we have a bug report for a bug in a particular dll that isn't
a component yet, the component should be added (by request).
My 2 biggest problems honestly are with the components we do have and
with the search page. If we could fix the components it would be
_much_ easier.. AFAIK there isnt much that can be done to the search
page on wine's end, all changes would have to go in at the mozilla
bugzilla tree.
What's wrong with the components (besides the possible lack of
components for some dlls) and the search page?
--
James Hawkins
