Re: final thoughts - bug tracking system

[Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai <asmodai@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

-On [20050917 14:56], Simon 'corecode' Schubert (corecode@xxxxxxxxxxxx) wrote:
>Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai wrote:
>>They aren't non-issues.  However, given how our own website looks the Jira
>>front-end will be a welcome relief to people (and no, I don't think our
>>website framework invites one to hack on it, sorry).
>
>I don't understand what you try to say with that.

That Jira invites one to participate and peruse it, over the twisted
pathways of 'our' own website.

>So now there is one company, Atlassian, which accepts this offer.  They 
>use open source software all over their products.  Hooray, that's what 
>makes the BSDL developer's heart beat faster.  And now you don't want to 
>take their offer to use this product for free?  Strange message to the 
>BSD community:  "We encourage companies to take our code, but if they do 
>so we don't want these products because they are not open source."

Like I said in my email, there's two sides to the coin of what signal you
give out.  On the one side you could insist that it is a negative signal, on
the other side you could say it is a positive signal.  And this is what
requires a bit of consideration.

>>Seems the only requirement for a user in Jira to create an issue is to
>>register.  Basically the same for any bug tracking mechanism nowadays.
>
>If you're talking about my eval install, then this was chosen by me. 
>You can as well allow anon entries or require users to be created by admins.

I can understand the reasoning for chosing that.  Creates a bit more
certainty for requesting feedback.

>>http://bugs.gnome.org/simple-bug-guide.cgi is very nice in how it takes
>>and guides the use through the steps of reporting in a consistent manner.
>>This is Gnome's Bugzilla customisation.  That doesn't mean I want use to
>>use Bugzilla, merely an example for the crowd that thinks Bugzilla is
>>clumsy for reporting.
>
>Yes I think so.  I still didn't receive the confirmation email and it's 
>been more than 15 minutes that I had to register there.  This is 
>something what I wouldn't accept.  If I want to report a bug, I want to 
>do it quickly.  If these developers don't want me to report it, then I 
>won't do it.  I don't need to report the bug after all.

Sure.  But you also have no guarantees that your system's MTA will always
work 100%.

>I am tired of this bikeshed.  I am tired af all those fucking bikesheds 
>all over.  Why is it like that?  Often enough I have the feeling that 
>it's not about the best working solution for the time being, but about 
>the eternal optimum.  I just want a bug tracking system.  One which is 
>easy to use.  For both users and developers.  I want to be able to post 
>followups per mail and not have to use a browser every time.  I want to 
>report bugs via mail.  I want to see which bugs are still open and 
>search them.  I want it to be easy for the users to search old bug 
>reports for issues they might encounter.  And I want such a system as 
>soon as possible!

Let me advise you to keep the temperament a bit reeled in, you will
encounter this kind of thing a lot in real life and the corporate sector
even moreso and even worse than what you encounter on any DragonFly or
FreeBSD mailing list.

If you cannot handle listening to the points of other people I seriously
wonder why you would want to be involved in a collective undertaking such as
this.  Everybody has the right to voice his or her opinions and just
labelling a discussion as a bikeshed already puts down a very negative stamp
on it.
Of course, you need to set up a timeframe for making decisions.  But as soon
as possible, well, we've been without for a long while, a few days more or
less make no difference.  Just make a decision at one point and that doesn't
come down to a few days more or less.

Also note that you say 'I', 'I', 'I' a lot.  I hope you considered things
from the *project's view* as well?

Also note that 'best' is very subjective of course.

>The problem with all those bikesheds is that they delay the 
>implementation of the *idea* far too long.  Most of the time people 
>agree on the idea (bikeshed), just not on the specific implementation 
>(color).  Can't we try to move to a different model:  Implement it the 
>way it was proposed unless somebody comes up with a better 
>implementation right away.  If not, just do it and change it later to 
>the better implementation.  It's extremely discouraging to me if my 

That does not always work.  It works better with source code, yes, but with
infrastructure it is less useful to adapt this approach, especially since
conversions/migrations are tedious, require a lot of time and effort, and
most of all switching users around is more invasive than switching source
code around.

Not saying that Jira is a bad choice at the moment.  From what I see now a
lot of the workflow seems to be pretty well thought out.  And with some of
the changes Joerg was testing and verifying with me it seems it should
handle what we might need.

>ideas get rolled over and over again by people who just have some 
>opinion about it but won't ever come to implement it themselves [no 
>offence, general statement].  I believe that most people out there feel 
>the same.  This is what cracks up the community.  Let's stop it, please.

I am wondering though what got you off on this tangent though, I did not
disagree with Jira here.  Just providing some general feedback.

-- 
Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven <asmodai(at)wxs.nl> / asmodai / kita no mono
Free Tibet! http://www.savetibet.org/ | http://www.andf.info/
http://www.tendra.org/   | http://www.in-nomine.org/
Whenever I associate with someone, may I think myself the lowest among all
and hold the other supreme in the depth of my heart...