Am Sonntag, den 06.12.2009, 10:44 +0000 schrieb Gale Andrews:
> | From James Crook <crookj@...>
> | Fri, 04 Dec 2009 14:59:54 +0000
> This was in "Release often; 1st Jan/1st Feb".
> > I'd like a decision from Gale on whether we should be on *Bugzilla* by
> > the 1st Jan. If we are going to move by then I think we should aim to
> > have the move done by 20th Dec, as otherwise it will be too disruptive
> > around the release time. I'm OK with it continuing to be undecided
> > whether Bugzilla is right for us for quite a long time, say even until
> > around May 2010. If it is still undecided then, then 'by fiat' Bugzilla
> > is not right for us, and in my view it is worth diverting some developer
> > energy, probably mine, to writing a better bug tracker that combines
> > advantages of wiki and normal bugtrackers.
> I still need some quality time using Bugzilla to be "sure", though it
> seems most of its problems are tweakable. The potential problem of
> the comments not being open to editing/pruning is hard to assess until
> it's used in anger, but I guess other Bugzilla users manage somehow?
> I'm a bit concerned this might cause us to start splitting/restarting
> bugs more than we might need to.
> I'd like to be able to decide in principle by mid January, but equally
> we don't want to put lots of effort into Bugzilla if the prospect of
> something better is realistic. I don't have a very clear picture of how
> a Wiki system of one bug per page (after the scatter-gather has been
> implemented) would work, or how well it would cope with a large
> quantity of bugs if we maintain the "assiduous" approach to bug
> Large numbers of bugs might seem to imply starting from a database
> solution, not from a text solution. Can Bugzilla be hacked to produce
> summaries/category lists and so on? And do you think the ideal bug
> tracker is sufficiently better than pure database that it justifies a lot
> of developer resources, rather than some other development for the
> app itself?
> I don't know the answers to those questions (or the resources needed
> to produce something better), so I'm trying to get a feel for it.
Reading your response, I got two impressions: It's very time consuming
to setup Bugzilla and you are unsure if it is what you searched for.
Instead of setting up Bugzilla, why not using Launchpad instead?
audacity  is already registered on Launchpad (you can get the
ownership for it, if you want). You can simply start using the bug
tracker . You only need a Launchpad account.
You want a mixture of an bugtracker and a wiki. Launchpad provides it to
you. You can edit the bug title and description (like a wiki) and add
You can map your priorities to Critical (P1), High (P2), Medium (P3),
Low (P4), and Wishlist (P5?).
You have some statuses: New, Incomplete (information are missing),
Invalid, Won't Fix, Confirmed (Someone could reproduce the issue),
Triaged (all information are gathered and you can start fixing the bug),
In Progress (you are working on fixing it), Fix Committed (it's fixed in
CVS head), Fix Released (a release contains the fix).
Launchpad supports milestones. You could say: "We want to fix the bug
before releasing 1.3.11".
Compared to other bug tracker (like Bugzilla) it is easy and simple. One
big plus is the ability to link to other bug tracker. For example you
could link a bug to the bug tracker of Gentoo, Fedora, Debian, Ubuntu,
when these distributions are affected, too.
Ubuntu Developer (www.ubuntu.com) | Debian Maintainer (www.debian.org)