Re: [LAD] meta issue tracker idea

Le 05/06/10 13:45, Renato a écrit : > > On Sat, 05 Jun 2010 13:18:02 +0200 > Philipp<hollunder(a)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?

> 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