Menu
▾
▴
webical-developers
|
From: <ma...@fu...> - 2007-12-28 14:03:37
|
hi all, I was busy reorganising the wiki a bit, when I came across the OpenIssues page. On this page I saw a huge list of issues that have to be fixed. But when I started reading some of the issues, some of them were already fixed or are not applicable anymore. I would like to see that issues are posted in the tracker instead of the wiki. I find it helpfull if i can report an issue i'm going to fix in a later state. This way I won't forget about it, and when the issue is resolved I can easily close it. The proces is made more transparent as other people can see what issues are there and who is working on. Progress will be easier to see. Issue should be assigned to a specific category so developers can pick them up easily. I think issues can be kept more up to date in the tracker and issues will be more clear to the outside. I'm not sure about the the titles for the tracker categories. I think there are two directions: Global category names or Specific category names. I guess it would be smart to use a bit of both. Bugs can be reported without assigning them to a category. Once a developer picks up the bug and finds out (throught the reporter) what the issue is, he can assign it to a specific category. And the bug/issue can be fixed. I want to propose the following tracker categories for bugs/issues: - None - Not sure - Frontend - html - css - Core - Wicket - Spring - Dao - Datebase (Hibernate) I hope you guys have some thoughts on this and maybe some remarks on my (proposed) approach and category names. cheers, Mattijs |
|
From: Zoran K. <zo...@fu...> - 2008-01-03 08:07:29
|
> I was busy reorganising the wiki a bit, when I came across the OpenIssues > page. On this page I saw a huge list of issues that have to be fixed. But > when I started reading some of the issues, some of them were already fixed > or are not applicable anymore. > > I would like to see that issues are posted in the tracker instead of the > wiki. I find it helpfull if i can report an issue i'm going to fix in a Obviously the best place is the tracker. Nice merciless refactoring :) > (...) > I guess it would be smart to use a bit of both. Bugs can be reported > without assigning them to a category. Once a developer picks up the bug > and finds out (throught the reporter) what the issue is, he can assign it > to a specific category. And the bug/issue can be fixed. Good process. > I want to propose the following tracker categories for bugs/issues: > > - None > - Not sure Why both of them? Can't the default be Not sure? > - Frontend > - html > - css > - Core > - Wicket > - Spring > - Dao > - Datebase (Hibernate) Perhaps make it technology independent? I.e. layers: presentation, service, data. What do the other developers and testers think? Best, Zoran -- Zoran Kovacevic Func. Internet Integration W http://www.func.nl M +31 6 48104284 T +31 20 4230000 F +31 20 4223500 GPG http://www.func.nl/keys/z.k...@fu... |
|
From: Ivo v. D. <ivo...@gm...> - 2008-01-03 08:47:45
|
Nice! Although I agree with zoran that a more generic batch of labels would probably be more useful. Also I don't think a separate catagory for hml and css is necessary, it will be handled by the same developers I think. How about something like this: Frontend Core Configuration Packaging Plugin system Documentation Other (facilities like maven repo, demo, nightly, etc) Regards, Ivo On Jan 3, 2008 9:06 AM, Zoran Kovacevic <zo...@fu...> wrote: > > I was busy reorganising the wiki a bit, when I came across the > OpenIssues > > page. On this page I saw a huge list of issues that have to be fixed. > But > > when I started reading some of the issues, some of them were already > fixed > > or are not applicable anymore. > > > > I would like to see that issues are posted in the tracker instead of the > > wiki. I find it helpfull if i can report an issue i'm going to fix in a > > Obviously the best place is the tracker. Nice merciless refactoring :) > > > (...) > > I guess it would be smart to use a bit of both. Bugs can be reported > > without assigning them to a category. Once a developer picks up the bug > > and finds out (throught the reporter) what the issue is, he can assign > it > > to a specific category. And the bug/issue can be fixed. > > Good process. > > > I want to propose the following tracker categories for bugs/issues: > > > > - None > > - Not sure > > Why both of them? Can't the default be Not sure? > > > - Frontend > > - html > > - css > > - Core > > - Wicket > > - Spring > > - Dao > > - Datebase (Hibernate) > > Perhaps make it technology independent? I.e. layers: presentation, > service, data. > > What do the other developers and testers think? > > Best, Zoran > > -- > Zoran Kovacevic > Func. Internet Integration > W http://www.func.nl > M +31 6 48104284 > T +31 20 4230000 > F +31 20 4223500 > GPG http://www.func.nl/keys/z.k...@fu... > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft > Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ > _______________________________________________ > Webical-developers mailing list > Web...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/webical-developers > -- Ivo van Dongen Func. Internet Integration W http://www.func.nl T +31 20 4230000 F +31 20 4223500 |
|
From: Mattijs H. <ma...@fu...> - 2008-01-03 09:04:26
|
> How about something like this: > > Frontend > Core > Configuration > Packaging > Plugin system > Documentation > Other (facilities like maven repo, demo, nightly, etc) I can agree with the more general categories, it seems less complex for other users. Still, I think it would be wise to have a little more categories for the core. If developers want to use the tracker to place issue that need to be addressed within the core, and assign issues to other developers, it would be nice if they could be a little bit more specific in the part the issue is concerned with. Maybe it's a good idea to have a little more core categories? Like: Frontend Core Core - Presentation Core - Managers Core - DAO Core - Datebase Configuration Packaging Plugin system Documentation Other (facilities like maven repo, demo, nightly, etc) I don't think the SF tracker supports sub categories (stupid!), so the prefix Core should make it clear for non developers what the category is about. cheers -- Mattijs Hoitink Func. Internet Integration W http://www.func.nl T +31 20 4230000 F +31 20 4223500 |
|
From: Ivo v. D. <ivo...@gm...> - 2008-01-03 09:11:33
|
On Jan 3, 2008 10:04 AM, Mattijs Hoitink <ma...@fu...> wrote: > > > How about something like this: > > > > Frontend > > Core > > Configuration > > Packaging > > Plugin system > > Documentation > > Other (facilities like maven repo, demo, nightly, etc) > I can agree with the more general categories, it seems less complex for > other users. Still, I think it would be wise to have a little more > categories for the core. If developers want to use the tracker to place > issue that need to be addressed within the core, and assign issues to > other developers, it would be nice if they could be a little bit more > specific in the part the issue is concerned with. Fine by me, but I don't get the difference between dao and database. We use a database in our current dao setup (although this is ot set in stone) but we're not about to fix bugs in mysql are we? The dao category could already include the java classes and the mapping files as they sort of go together anyway. > > Maybe it's a good idea to have a little more core categories? Like: > > Frontend > Core > Core - Presentation > Core - Managers > Core - DAO > Core - Datebase > Configuration > Packaging > Plugin system > Documentation > Other (facilities like maven repo, demo, nightly, etc) > > I don't think the SF tracker supports sub categories (stupid!), so the > prefix Core should make it clear for non developers what the category is > about. The bugtracker uses Category and group. You can combine these two as you see fit, but prefixing is fine as well. > > cheers > > -- > Mattijs Hoitink > Func. Internet Integration > W http://www.func.nl > T +31 20 4230000 > F +31 20 4223500 > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft > Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ > _______________________________________________ > Webical-developers mailing list > Web...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/webical-developers > -- Ivo van Dongen Func. Internet Integration W http://www.func.nl T +31 20 4230000 F +31 20 4223500 |
|
From: Mattijs H. <ma...@fu...> - 2008-01-03 09:14:06
|
I just had a look at the SF tracker system and saw the option to add a new tracker. The add screen contains the following text: "You can use this system to track virtually any kind of data, with each tracker having separate user, group, category, and permission lists. You can also easily move items between trackers when needed." Would it be a good idea to create a developer tracker where we van put the core issues for developers. We could create detailed core categories in that tracker. This would make sense as we don't want to hassle user with development issues. Bugs can stay in the separate tracker for bugs where user can report them with the global categories. Sounds good? cheers Mattijs Hoitink wrote: >> How about something like this: >> >> Frontend >> Core >> Configuration >> Packaging >> Plugin system >> Documentation >> Other (facilities like maven repo, demo, nightly, etc) >> > I can agree with the more general categories, it seems less complex for > other users. Still, I think it would be wise to have a little more > categories for the core. If developers want to use the tracker to place > issue that need to be addressed within the core, and assign issues to > other developers, it would be nice if they could be a little bit more > specific in the part the issue is concerned with. > > Maybe it's a good idea to have a little more core categories? Like: > > Frontend > Core > Core - Presentation > Core - Managers > Core - DAO > Core - Datebase > Configuration > Packaging > Plugin system > Documentation > Other (facilities like maven repo, demo, nightly, etc) > > I don't think the SF tracker supports sub categories (stupid!), so the > prefix Core should make it clear for non developers what the category is > about. > > cheers > > -- > Mattijs Hoitink > Func. Internet Integration > W http://www.func.nl > T +31 20 4230000 > F +31 20 4223500 > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft > Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ > _______________________________________________ > Webical-developers mailing list > Web...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/webical-developers > -- Mattijs Hoitink Func. Internet Integration W http://www.func.nl T +31 20 4230000 F +31 20 4223500 |
|
From: Ivo v. D. <ivo...@gm...> - 2008-01-03 09:20:50
|
Well, actually no. To make bug management viable we need some support from our users in making sure bugs aren't reported over and over. One tracker with a clear layout would make it easy for a user to search for a known issue before reporting a new one. If we keep a separated tracker we can't expect users to search both of them (we're lucky if they take the time to report a bug at all :)). On a side note: How do we move issues from one tracker to another? This would be very useful to move some bugs to the features tracker. Ivo On Jan 3, 2008 10:13 AM, Mattijs Hoitink <ma...@fu...> wrote: > I just had a look at the SF tracker system and saw the option to add a > new tracker. The add screen contains the following text: > > "You can use this system to track virtually any kind of data, with each > tracker having separate user, group, category, and permission lists. You > can also easily move items between trackers when needed." > > Would it be a good idea to create a developer tracker where we van put > the core issues for developers. We could create detailed core categories > in that tracker. This would make sense as we don't want to hassle user > with development issues. > Bugs can stay in the separate tracker for bugs where user can report > them with the global categories. > > Sounds good? > > cheers > > > Mattijs Hoitink wrote: > >> How about something like this: > >> > >> Frontend > >> Core > >> Configuration > >> Packaging > >> Plugin system > >> Documentation > >> Other (facilities like maven repo, demo, nightly, etc) > >> > > I can agree with the more general categories, it seems less complex for > > other users. Still, I think it would be wise to have a little more > > categories for the core. If developers want to use the tracker to place > > issue that need to be addressed within the core, and assign issues to > > other developers, it would be nice if they could be a little bit more > > specific in the part the issue is concerned with. > > > > Maybe it's a good idea to have a little more core categories? Like: > > > > Frontend > > Core > > Core - Presentation > > Core - Managers > > Core - DAO > > Core - Datebase > > Configuration > > Packaging > > Plugin system > > Documentation > > Other (facilities like maven repo, demo, nightly, etc) > > > > I don't think the SF tracker supports sub categories (stupid!), so the > > prefix Core should make it clear for non developers what the category is > > about. > > > > cheers > > > > -- > > Mattijs Hoitink > > Func. Internet Integration > > W http://www.func.nl > > T +31 20 4230000 > > F +31 20 4223500 > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft > > Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. > > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ > > _______________________________________________ > > Webical-developers mailing list > > Web...@li... > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/webical-developers > > > > -- > Mattijs Hoitink > Func. Internet Integration > W http://www.func.nl > T +31 20 4230000 > F +31 20 4223500 > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft > Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ > _______________________________________________ > Webical-developers mailing list > Web...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/webical-developers > -- Ivo van Dongen Func. Internet Integration W http://www.func.nl T +31 20 4230000 F +31 20 4223500 |
Thanks for helping keep SourceForge clean.
X