[LAD] meta issue tracker idea

[Philipp Überbacher]

Excerpts from Renato's message of 2010-06-05 13:45:54 +0200:
> 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. 

Sorry everyone that I'm very slow at replying, especially to long and
elaborate mails (this is not one of those). I have important exams this
month, so I have neither a lot of time nor mind for it. However, I'll
try to keep the idea alive.

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

I believe so too, at least in the simplest form, a wiki.

> 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

It would be nice, yes, but I'm not totally sure this is possible using a
wiki.
-- 
Regards,
Philipp

--
"Wir stehen selbst enttäuscht und sehn betroffen / Den Vorhang zu und alle Fragen offen." Bertolt Brecht, Der gute Mensch von Sezuan