Talk:Tracking bugs in Extras

- Requirement proposal: After clicking bugtracker link, you can start filing a bug right away or just after clicking one link at maximum at the page that opens. --ossipena 09:38, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

- Requirement proposal: Bug report has to be directly notified to the maintainer. --torpedo48 9:57, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

- Requirement proposal: When Bugtracker link is not supplied default bugtracker is used. Default bugtracker is packages interface itself, or maintainer mail address. This way QA time can be reduced in some cases by weeks when Bugtracker field shaping is not needed. --mikkov 08:31, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

- How are you going to report a bug to package interface? With magic? Email is of course fine with smaller packages--ossipena 09:21, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

- Come on! I think runs mostly on PHP code not magic. Most important thing here is there should be a default bugtracker for all packages like in any other big distro. --mikkov 10:27, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

- Are you serious? creating a bugtracker takes couple minutes, putting your email to correct configuration file when packaging takes couple seconds. It is same rules for everyone, why others must do it and you don't? --ossipena 10:45, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

- Of course I am serious. I'd like to see good infrastructure and current one isn't good enough. Look at Ubuntu for example. -- mikkov 21:58, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

- Bugtracker link requirement in package has no real benefit. Better system is that (or something else) is declared default bugtracker and bugtracker field can be used to indicate if some other bug tracker is used instead. Additionally the link is really only used in where link can be added separately. This way one package testing is immediately simplified (and some packages is limbo are freed).mikkov 13:50, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

- So you insist every link must be added separately via pages? why not in the packaging phase? same work, different timing though. --ossipena 10:50, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

- No I don't insist that they must but could. It's less work because when it's not to your liking it's easier to fix it (2 weeks vs. 1 minute) -- mikkov 21:58, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

- Embedding bugtrackers links in the packages themselves makes bug reporting easy and immediate for every user who knows a little about our bugtracking system and conventions. Why changing our easy-to-use and easy-to-remember convention with different one? Nonsense. --torpedo48 12:50, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

- Bugtracker link in package isn't easy to use or easy to remember. How many packages have been turned down only because link isn't valid? I'm asking for flexibility, bugtracker link isn't critical and it can be handled separately if maintainer likes to handle it that way. Each time when package is voted down because of bugtracker other two weeks is lost, for no good reason. Again if default bugtracker existed then bugtracker field could be used, but on for good reason (bugs are handled somewhere else upstream)-- mikkov 21:58, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

- Link to package testing site itself?

  • A link to the package in the testing queue[packagename] The reason is that there will be no bug history once there is published a new version.This is clearly a proposal and not agreed with. Also mailto links don't have any public records mikkov 16:17, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

- Yeah bugtrcker take 5 min to be created ... when you could create one yourself on ... but this is not the case ... as a maintainer you cannot also create a new version but must send a mail !!! This QA Testing rules are becoming more and more boring ... Currently it s take me more time to conform to all that rules which changes all the time than coding the application ! The result is less evolutions, features, improvement, and bugs fix ... and this QA Process make me so furious that i decide just to stop to try to publish things to extras ... Now i ve 2 solutions : - create my own repository - say to users to install extras devel The both can be easy for users by making some .install file ! That was a good community one year ago ... now i m feeling excluded from it. khertan

- I still can't understand the problem. It is simple as hell: just create a bugtracker (if you can't obtain a bugtracker in, just use the Garage!) and insert a link in the bugtracker field. I'm new in this community, I don't know how it was years ago but I know one thing: it needs some more strictness in testing rules. You know what makes ME furious? The fact that a few people (luckily not the majority, which seems to understand the simplicity of these little rules) can't follow those two easy steps! torpedo48

- Hum ... and to create a garage project for each package ?

Send an email ... to create a new version in the bug tracker ... send an email ... this isn't serious ...

Currently look far away than your nose ... how many apps ready for user are available in extras-devel and how many are in extras ? Yep right ... continue like that ... this will end with a divided community, many repositories ... Clearly for me it s a no go ... I ll just stop to try to push my apps to extras ... i prefer "lost my time" to fix and improve. I ll just create my own repository, own bugtracker on my web site ... and nobody will got karma for posting bugs ...

And bugtracker is just one of the painful step to push apps to extras ... khertan

- Is it to difficult for you to create a bugtracker in Garage for all your apps? You can use every bugtracker you want, you can even have just one for a hundred apps, I don't care. The important thing is that bugs can be sent to you directly. AND, if all the ready apps would be in Extras without some control and rules, it would be a mess; when the first problem would come up, the community would collapse on itself like a house of cards. We are building the bases of a great future, we can't leave holes; of course not everybody will be happy initially, but it's a necessary condition for the starting. torpedo48

You need to have developers for that

- Me neither can't understand the problem with using packages interface in bugtracker. After all big part of the bugs are reported only there during testing period. Maintainer gets immediate notification of a new message and everybody else sees all the other messages. Maintainers of bigger projects which actually get some bugs reported are likely to get a real bugtracker. For the lesser projects simple forum like system within (which is partially hidden) works very well for the purpose. Seriously bugtracker links isn't the issue which should be on top of things in QA process. -- mikkov 22:10, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for explaining you thoughts. I can follow your arguments. I also think it's better to have a link to the package system then to use an email address only. But if the application is getting more complex there should be a regular bug tracker - imho.--jukey 11:01, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

-- My summary: Some flexibility is needed in bugtracker links. Maintainers are able to choose best bugtracker for their needs. Default bugtracker for all packages should be the target in -- mikkov 23:48, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

- I'll take some of the arguments here like a joke, because taking more time trying to fulfill the Q&A rules than coding the app... Q&A requirements are one time change for package, once you get it right you don't need to care more about it, and is not that difficult to get right, even theme makers without any code/package experience can make good packages.

Mikkov has some good suggestions, and I agree that the current situations is far from good, we have proposed changes to the package interface that can improve things a bit and we're open to more suggestions, but we only have one coder to implement them :(. Anyway I'll evaluate the proposals and report back. -- VDVsx 15:14, 6 March 2010 (UTC)