-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Jul 26, 2006, at 1:42 AM, Brad Bollenbach wrote:
On Tue, 2006-25-07 at 16:36 +1200, Matthew Paul Thomas wrote:
...
On Jul 25, 2006, at 1:32 AM, Brad Bollenbach wrote:
...
* Allow a bug to have only one status per
distribution/distrorelease/product, rather than being able to track
the assignee, status, milestone, importance, etc. per bug per
package. This makes it easy to not duplicate a bug in a distro or
product bug listing and reduces the likelihood of seeing dupes in
+subscribedbugs and such, and would generally simplify tracking the
status of a bug.
Sometimes the same bug will need fixing in multiple packages.
I'm suggesting that if, say, three packages are affected in a distro,
that would be one task with three packages associated to it, rather
than three tasks, each having their own assignee, status, importance,
milestone, etc.
Our current, per-package model, is unnecessarily complicated, as Simon
Law brought to my attention in Paris.
I don't think I understand that. Having a single status per task is
unnecessarily complicated, but having multiple packages per task would
be simpler? How does that work?
If a bug needs fixing in multiple packages, it won't necessarily even
be fixed by the same person in each, let alone in the same day.
* Allow a user to associate themselves with distributions and
products in a user preferences screen. This information could act a
magnifying glass on bug listings, and bug pages, and other parts of
Launchpad. So, if you're associated with distro A, but not distro B,
and a bug is reported in both, you see only the status for distro A
in your +subscribedbugs list. Some exceptions would be made, like
being shown that a "fix exists" if the bug was fixed upstream or by
another distro.
I think that would be unnecessarily difficult to understand and
configure, as well as not working for people who weren't logged in.
I think it can be made not too difficult to understand. For example
(disclaimer: high-level, brainstorm idea) after filing a bug on
Ubuntu, we could suggest to the user "Do you want to _add Ubuntu to
your watch list_? (_huh?_)"
I think that would be taunting people, by making them think that the
(much more useful) product/package/distribution subscriptions had been
implemented, when they haven't. :-)
I was a bit unclear, in that by "unnecessarily difficult to understand
and configure" I was referring to the ratio of effort to benefit. I
don't think people will be bothered maintaining such a list of
distributions/products they're interested for such a minor benefit.
It should work fine for people who are not logged in, because the
"contextless" reports which are the hard ones to address for repeating
a bug--+subscribedbugs, +reportedbugs, +assignedbugs,
+packagebugs--aren't accessible to anonymous users.
...
Good point.
- --
Matthew Paul Thomas
http://mpt.net.nz/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (Darwin)
iD8DBQFExutu6PUxNfU6ecoRAtSuAJ4soR56c3BDauYaoOSX54jFjAPX3ACeMlNl
x0j59moe+h9GO4d5XvB5Nn4=
=X4zP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
launchpad-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/launchpad-users
