On Fri, 5 Dec 2003, Jonathan Phillips wrote:
> I don't think reducing this list to the teens will be a problem, as many
> of the bugs will be cut out with our new implementations and
> improvements in UI.
> Most of the bugs seem to be in usability.
Cool, I sure hope that's so.
> Also, many bugs in the sodi tracker were actually requests for features,
> so please everyone look at the new features.
For bugs that are actually feature requests, let's make sure those get
recategorized. No need to have them count against us while we're
getting the bugs ground out.
> I think my next task will be to move feature requests from sodi over to
> inkscape. Do you all trust me to do that initially? I know we need much
> discussion over these requested features. I will move them over first,
> then after that, we should all spend time looking at feature requests
> and post ideas/solutions to the wiki.
I agree; patches were the first priority, and those are done. Bugs
second, and thanks to you those are also done. So feature requests are
the one remaining item.
Note that I had gone through the Sodipodi feature list long ago and
organized them into programming tasks:
I did this because many of the feature request tickets were repetitive,
or insufficiently specific, or contained multiple requests in a given
ticket. I think these programming tasks are clearer and more specific
about what to do to get the feature implemented.
However, I found that being a couple levels down on the website they
tended to not get much notice, so this may have been a bad place to put
them. I am wondering if having them in the feature request tracker (so
all RFE's can be found in one place), or in wiki (so they can be
discussed and revised), would be superior. Maybe some combination of
both. I'll leave that decision to you.
Also, speaking of Wiki, there is also a scratchpad where I've been
tossing random feature requests that come in:
This is considered just a temporary staging area though, and all of the
requests should be migrated into the proper feature request tracker.
If we chose to leverage Wiki moreso than the RFE tracker, an approach I
had considered would be to first start by migrating the Programming
Tasks from the Sodipodi website into Inkscape Wiki - you can get the
files via Sodipodi SF CVS or from the website tarball in the Sodipodi
Downloads page. Then go through the Inkscape FeatureNotePad and move
any repeated feature requests over as appropriate. Finally go through
the Sodipodi RFE tracker and copy over those. I would then use the RFE
tracker just as a mechanism for users to submit new feature requests;
perhaps we'd close them once they were incorporated into Wiki.
If we chose to use the RFE tracker over Wiki, then the process would be
similar to the above except the written up feature requests would reside
in the RFE tracker instead of Wiki.
I think I tend to prefer having the feature requests end up in Wiki,
since that allows them to be elaborated on, discussed, revised,
etc. which is valuable to do in order to make them implementable, and
that's exactly the sort of thing Wiki's are good for. The RFE tracker
works good as an "inbox" since it gives a consistent way for users to
submit to, along with bugs and patches.
Anyway, what do others think?