On 5 June 2010 21:58, Olivier Guilyardi <[email protected]> wrote: > Le 05/06/10 13:45, Renato a écrit : >> >> On Sat, 05 Jun 2010 13:18:02 +0200 >> Philipp<[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> this is all about making Linux Audio more useful. >>> The idea came about because on the one hand there are parts of Linux >>> audio that really need some coders attention and on the other hand >>> there are coders who don't know where to start. I realize that there >>> never are more than enough coders, so this is mainly about bringing >>> attention to the parts that need it the most. >>> >>> To a degree it's what bug/feature trackers are there for, but those >>> are usually per application, and while there are category and priority >>> systems in place those are rarely used. >>> So what this is also about is bridging a gap between users, developers >>> and between applications. >>> >>> It would be quite simple really. >>> An easy to find, central place, possibly a wiki or a tracker. >>> Anyone, a user most likely, describes his workflow and what the >>> showstopper is. This could be applications not syncing properly, or an >>> essential but missing feature. The idea is to tackle mainly >>> infrastructure and cross application problems, with the goal to make a >>> workflow actually work. >>> The user should have to specify all relevant information available, >>> such as version information, links, probably some kind of priority or >>> urgency indication and how hard he believes it would be. >>> He could also put up a reward of sorts, not necessarily monetary. >>> Any developer could pick up the task and work on it, possibly leaving >>> a notice. >>> >>> The possible benefits I see are: >>> a) A kind of overview of what's needed the most, one place where you >>> can see what's actually important to users. >>> b) A way to identify and fix problems between applications - >>> something I believe is very important for a system that encourages >>> the use of multiple applications at once. I believe there are numerous >>> synchronisation/transport issues for example which are never really >>> tackled, despite this being a very important part of the >>> infrastructure. c) Emphasis on actual workflow and usability. >>> d) It would work for any program, even those without tracker and those >>> that aren't high profile and aren't usually in the center of >>> attention. >>> >>> Could this work? What do you think?
Sure, it's a neat idea. If implemented _properly_, it will at least serve the function of having a centralised database of such issues. But what really caught my attention is this: >> One feature I believe would be useful is that if I file a "bug" >> regarding the interaction of app 1,2 and 3, the relative devs get >> automatically mailed and can jump in the discussion Now, I'm not very optimistic about co-operation between developers of app 1, 2 and 3, unless all three are high-profile. The only assurance is a monetary bounty system. -- GPG/PGP ID: B42DDCAD _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
