On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 08:23:51PM +0200, Francisco Vila wrote: > 2009/5/29 Graham Percival <[email protected]>: > > Yes, that does sound too stupid. :) We already have the google > > tracker. Don't re-invent the wheel. > > Thank you for the smiley.
Hey, you're the one that threw in the "too stupid" comment. I'm just agreeing with you. Isn't nice when people agree with you? :) > > "asignees" as in "Graham will work on this bug"? We can use the > > "owner" field for this. I mean, nobody cares whether the bug was > > added by me or Valentin. > > True! Then this would mean "Graham _wants_ to work on this bug and he > has marked it as 'mine' so he will fix it sooner or later because he > sees himself like the perfect guy to do it, although right now he > cannot find the time". Yeah. > The information on "creator" would be lost if we use the same field. > Flyspray has "creator" plus "asignee". Again, the "creator" is almost always just the Bug Meister of the time. That info is not useful in the least. > > The problem is that we don't have enough bug fixers. If we get so > > If I'd see an easy [web] bug for me, I'd mark it as mine, think of it > as a micro-compromise of a smaller grain, I see it as a gain on > productivity because possibly huge tasks are never taken by their > size. ... > Well, remember that I am talking with the oncoming web project in > mind, and we need to evaluate the current use given to the bugtracker > as being (or not being) idoneous for working on the web. Sure, and I'm not opposed to this on some principle. If we find a compelling case to be made to do this, then we could get a lot more formal about bug tracking, discussing, assigning, etc. But at the moment, I can only see such things annoying the few people we have fixing stuff. Cheers, - Graham _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
