[LAD] meta issue tracker idea

[Renato]

On Sat, 05 Jun 2010 13:18:02 +0200
Philipp <hollunder at lavabit.com> 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?

As a user, I think this is a great idea - and a much needed one given
that, as Philipp points out and as we all know, the linux audio system
really works only with multiple interacting applications. 

I think it would even be quite easy to set it up.

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

renato