Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: > > Le Jeudi, 9 oct 2003, � 12:13 Europe/Zurich, Carsten Ziegeler a �crit : > > ...And we also create a process in the following way: > > - the wiki feature request page is scanned from time to time (the mails > > help there) > > - A new entry is evaluated (perhaps the feature doesn't make sense or > > is a bug or is a really cool thing etc.) and if accepted added > > to our planning document. > > So the planning document in our docs contains the approved list of > > feature > > requests.... > > See what you mean, but this could also be a list of pointers to > bugzilla. Ok. Perhaps automatically generated somehow?
> > IMHO if we start to use bugzilla more seriously, we will need a > slightly more precise categorization of issues: > -actual bugs with different severity levels (can do) > -patches ([PATCH] header is a hack but more or less workable) > -feature requests > -release-related stuff (if we want to use bugzilla dependencies to > prepare releases) > -more? > > Meaning that we shouldn't count just "open issues" anymore, rather > "open bugs", "open feature requests", "open patches" etc. Yes, that's true! > On Monday we were focused on "total open issues" which is wrong IMHO. Right, bugs are more important imho. > > I think this is easier to do in bugzilla where everything is dynamic. Agreed. > > This might need adding more possible values to the "severity" field, > dunno off the top of my head how easy it is to do. Otherwise we can use > title headers like [RELEASE] [REQUEST] etc. > > For feature requests, my suggestion would be to do so: > -Let them come in bugzilla > -Evaluate them often, and close the ones which seem too far away with > resolution=LATER > -Explain all this on a wiki page, with links to bugzilla queries to > show what's current > Ok, we can give it a try. > This would help give more importance to bugzilla for planning/progress > monitoring stuff, which I think is good. > And in this way we avoid the need to synchronize lists or move stuff > between bugzilla and the wiki. Yes, that's right. Ok, I tend to agree with you that using bugzilla is better (and easier). But the differentiation using [PATCH], [XYZ] is a little bit ugly. If it's possible to use a different (better) approach there I'm fine with it. Carsten
