[LAD] meta issue tracker idea

[Olivier Guilyardi]

Le 05/06/10 13:45, Renato a écrit :
> 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?

I think that it's a good idea.

One point with trackers is that each ticket must focus on a specific problem. 
Respecting this rule is feasible I think, but may be tricky with 
interoperability bugs.

> 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

Being able to add link(s) to upstream ticket(s), as in launchpad, could also be 
useful.

--
   Olivier