Am Samstag, 28. Juni 2008 11:13:20 schrieb Dennis Schridde:
> Am Freitag, 27. Juni 2008 09:56:19 schrieb Per Inge Mathisen:
> > On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 3:41 PM, Dennis Schridde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
> > >> I am quite sure we have discussed this before, and we made a decision
> > >> that we should not put feature requests in the bug tracker, because
> > >> this would fill up the bug tracker and make it harder to find and sort
> > >> bugs. (And I hope you agree that fixing bugs is more important than
> > >> adding features.)
> > >
> > > I think that is what priority:wish is for. :) You can iirc filter for
> > > priority>wish
> >
> > But you cannot filter it away, at least not easily. So feature
> > requests will pollute the bug list. That is unacceptable. We *need* to
> > focus on clearing the bug list, and then it must be readily and easily
> > available. Bugs must not be hidden among hundreds of feature requests.
> > Bug reports are much more important than feature requests!
> >
> > > And yes, I agree that there should no feature request popup in the
> > > bugtracker which are unrealistic.
> > > Discuss with other users -> file a request. In that order.
> > > There are also wrong or newbie bugreports, but the overall quality is
> > > acceptable. I think if we can make the discuss-first-report-later
> > > policy clear to the users, the same would work for feature requests.
> >
> > Who is going to tell people that their fancy, enthustiastic idea is
> > stupid, and emphasize the point by rudely closing their feature
> > request? It is either not going to happen, or it will take way too
> > much developer time.
> >
> > Take the idea of limited ammo for all units. This was discussed
> > extensively in connection with Watermelon's patch that implemented
> > this feature. I am not sure if this was on the forums or on this list,
> > or both. It was soundly rejected - yet it appears again as a feature
> > request in the bug tracker. If we cannot simply close it because it is
> > misplaced, we would have to restart a time consuming discussion about
> > this feature in the bug tracker - a place hardly anybody reads. It is
> > much better that such ideas are raised in the forums, and if there is
> > agreement enough that this is a good idea, then a wiki page is started
> > for it that sketches out how it can be implemented, and answers are
> > worked out for the problems people see with it. This way also rejected
> > ideas can be documented with reasons why - instead of being closed and
> > buried in a tracker, which is in any case much harder to read.
> Sounds like a good proposal. The only thing I am interested in is that
> a) Working (or maybe-working) ideas are not lost and
> b) I do not have to a follow disccussion of a dozen features, just in case
> one post out of a hundred might contain something that's worth thinking
> about. (With the other ones, while not necessarily stupid, being nothing
> I'd spend too much time on, or already being offtopic. Take the "wish list"
> thread as an example: I did not read the first one fully and never looked
> into the second one. 9 pages and growing, holy s*...)
> So we tell people to discuss ideas whereever, and when they agree with
> eachother that they have a good proposal, they shall create a wiki page
> describing the feature/change they want, also handling implications or
> difficulties this might impose?
> And we then go through that list some times, promoting those which we think
> are good and implementable to the next stage?
> A wiki template might be a nice thing to provide a few (!) informations as
> a header.

Basically this is something like this, right?

I'd like to hear input from other people as well...

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Warzone-dev mailing list

Reply via email to