And, by the way, why techbase.kde.org ? Why not community.kde.org ? http://techbase.kde.org/Projects states that info for external users should go to techbase, for internal - to community.kde.org. Not that I am against techbase - I just want raise and solve this question before I start filling my pages. Not a big fan of moving pages from one wiki to another :)
On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 1:06 PM, Artem Serebriyskiy <[email protected]>wrote: > > > On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 12:07 PM, Vishesh Handa <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Hey Everyone >> >> I think tracking development is a great idea, and using a wiki is a lot >> better than bugzilla. But, still, a wiki? Editing a wiki is a somewhat >> laborious task. Plus, it doesn't even look that good. Then again, that will >> hopefully be improved. Does anyone know of any better tools to track >> development? I'm hoping for something that is a bit more machine readable. >> > I don't [know], but may be there is a way to add such a page to > projects.kde.org instead of wiki? It already tracks commits, project > descriptions and so on. May be it can provide us with some 'metaproject' > page for Nepomuk where we can propogate statuses from usual nepomuk projects > pages? > > But, again, I have no idea what can Redmine do and what can't. So this weak > idea needs more exploration. > >> >> Anyway, lets go on with the wiki page for now. It's better than nothing. >> >> I'll add what all I'm working on over there. >> Maybe even clean up the pages. >> >> On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 8:53 PM, Sebastian Trüg <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> maybe splitting into core and apps would be nice, too? "Core" being the >>> backend stuff like storage/DMS, file indexer, query service and the >>> libraries, "apps" the rest >>> >> >> Yes. That's a great idea. >> >> >>> >>> On 07/03/2011 11:51 AM, Paweł Paprota wrote: >>> > Hey, >>> > >>> > On 07/03/2011 11:41 AM, Artem Serebriyskiy wrote: >>> >> And what are the policies/guidlines of adding a project to this page ? >>> >> >>> > >>> > Good question - this should be stated on the page. IMHO every >>> > development activity (at the high level) should be reflected in the >>> status. >>> > >>> > If there will be too many entries, it can be split into categories >>> > (GSOC, refactoring, bugfixing etc.) but I think the more information >>> the >>> > better. >>> > >>> >> On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 1:30 PM, Paweł Paprota<[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >> >>> >>> Hey, >>> >>> >>> >>> On 07/03/2011 10:58 AM, Sebastian Trüg wrote: >>> >>>> Just a quick "yes, please" from me. I think this is a very good idea >>> and >>> >>>> I would gladly track my tasks on such a page, link other information >>> to >>> >>>> it and blog about it. >>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Good to hear! >>> >>> >>> >>>> Would you take the task of finishing this page? Maybe add a big fat >>> >>>> Nepomuk logo on top? ;) >>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Sure. The problem is that I don't actually know what tasks are being >>> >>> worked on currently! This was in fact the main reason for starting >>> the >>> >>> tracking page. >>> >>> >>> >>> Moreover, the core of this idea is that the tracking will be done >>> >>> collectively so nothing's stopping anyone from updating the status. >>> >>> >>> >>> I still have a few ideas on how to improve the shape and form of the >>> >>> page itself but obviously further suggestions are welcome. >>> >>> >>> >>> So basically to answer your question once again - yes and what else >>> >>> would you like to see there? >>> >>> >>> >>> Paweł >>> >>> >>> >>>> Cheers >>> >>>> Sebastian >>> >>>> >>> >>>> On 07/03/2011 09:34 AM, Paweł Paprota wrote: >>> >>>>> Hello, >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> as I'm about to start another development task in the Nepomuk >>> project, >>> >>>>> an idea came to my mind. I already said random things on IRC about >>> using >>> >>>>> Bugzilla for tracking development but I've decided to give this >>> idea a >>> >>>>> proper shape. >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> So here is the first iteration: >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> http://techbase.kde.org/Projects/Nepomuk/DevelopmentStatus >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> There is enough introductory information on the page that I think >>> >>>>> there's no need to duplicate the explanation of the idea in this >>> e-mail. >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> Let me know what you think and if it would be feasible to try to >>> >>>>> maintain this page and see how it works (or doesn't work). >>> >>>>> >>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>> >>>> Nepomuk mailing list >>> >>>> [email protected] >>> >>>> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/nepomuk >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> >>> Nepomuk mailing list >>> >>> [email protected] >>> >>> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/nepomuk >>> >>> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >>> >> Nepomuk mailing list >>> >> [email protected] >>> >> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/nepomuk >>> > >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > Nepomuk mailing list >>> > [email protected] >>> > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/nepomuk >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Nepomuk mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/nepomuk >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Vishesh Handa >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Nepomuk mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/nepomuk >> >> > > > -- > Sincerely yours, > Artem Serebriyskiy > -- Sincerely yours, Artem Serebriyskiy
_______________________________________________ Nepomuk mailing list [email protected] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/nepomuk
