[GRASS5] Dealing with old bug reports: new GRASS 6 bugtracker?

[Bernhard Reiter]

Hi Markus,

On Sat, Jul 23, 2005 at 06:37:20AM +0200, Markus Neteler wrote:
> (CC Bernhard)
> 
> On Fri, Jul 22, 2005 at 12:27:06PM -0400, Helena Mitasova wrote:

> To clarify: I meant bugs where the developers say that it is resolved and
> the users do not confirm.

in my view, those should be closed after a reasonable amount of time.

> > >>In summary: The 452 bug reports do NOT reflect the current that of
> > >>GRASS 6. It's simply misleading. 

If a user is still on GRASS5 (and usually there is a reason for this)
then this bug still affects GRASS6 in some way.
A bug database also does not need to be representative,
Debian and KDE always have thousands of bugs open.
It is a tool and database mainly for helper and developers.

> > >>Other suggestion: We set up a separate bugtracker for GRASS 6.
> > 
> > Please do that - I spent two days trying to help clean bugtracker
> > just recently and it was indeed a frustrating experience.

I would be interesting why it was frustrating technically,
because it seems always a bit frustrating when we do not have enough
people helping with the tracker.
Technically, if you set up a filter for grass6 bugs, then you are
not seeing the others.

> > Setting up separate bugtracker for GRASS6 should solve half of the 
> > problems 

Can you explain what problems will be solved?

> > and if Maciek does a good job in sorting out the real bugs
> > from complaints and users problems and tracing the status of important 
> > bugs with people who have
> > the expertise to fix them we should be in a pretty good shape.

> @Bernhard: what do you think, is there a possibility to 
> split RT?

It is work, but of course it is possible.
I would not really recommend it and I still want to propose a new
infrastructure for GRASS based on gforge at some day (no schedule yet,
but we have a lot of it running already).
This would allow for a better integration of several trackers.
Another option would be to move to roundup.

	Bernhard
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/grass-dev/attachments/20050725/14120808/attachment.bin