<HTML><HEAD></HEAD>
<BODY dir=ltr>
<DIV dir=ltr>
<DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 12pt">
<DIV>Hi I feel we need to discuss how to organize all entries at <A
href="http://bugs.owncloud.org/thebuggenie/">http://bugs.owncloud.org/thebuggenie/</A>,
today we have an almost empty roadmap: <A
href="http://bugs.owncloud.org/thebuggenie/owncloud/roadmap">http://bugs.owncloud.org/thebuggenie/owncloud/roadmap</A>
and a massive amount of uncategorized issues at the mainpage. It's very hard to
follow and keep track of what to expect out of the next release. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Today there are two separate changelogs, one here: <A
href="http://gitorious.org/owncloud/pages/OwnCloud4Features">http://gitorious.org/owncloud/pages/OwnCloud4Features</A>
(<A
href="http://gitorious.org/owncloud/pages/OwnCloud3Features)">http://gitorious.org/owncloud/pages/OwnCloud3Features)</A>
and the other <A
href="http://bugs.owncloud.org/thebuggenie/owncloud/roadmap">http://bugs.owncloud.org/thebuggenie/owncloud/roadmap</A>.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I see no point in having both of these. We should choose one or the
other.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I vote for a scenario where <A
href="http://bugs.owncloud.org/thebuggenie/">http://bugs.owncloud.org/thebuggenie/</A>
acts as a frontend for <A
href="http://gitorious.org/owncloud">http://gitorious.org/owncloud</A>. All
issue tracking and reporting/scheduling is handled by <A
href="http://bugs.owncloud.org/thebuggenie/">http://bugs.owncloud.org/thebuggenie/</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><A
href="http://bugs.owncloud.org/thebuggenie/owncloud/roadmap">http://bugs.owncloud.org/thebuggenie/owncloud/roadmap</A>
has a ""Targetted for" entry and if all bugs and feature requests etc are
maintained by the included "Targetted for ownCloud * Release" it will be a great
tool for scheduling which features/bugs will be expected to be added/fixed for
the upcoming milestones/releases.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>For this to function though I feel there has to be some moderation, a few
people who can categorize these issues into milestones, first when a merge
request is well on its way it would be categorized (there probably has to be a
"in the future" milestone aswell) into one of the release milestones. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Also bugfixes should be categorized depending on how much work it would
take to implement plus how critical it is to fix.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I dont think its a good idea to have the person reporting a bug (as long as
its not him/her fixing it themselves) to set the "Targetted for" tag as they
probably dont know the answer to the above. (how much work it would take to
implement plus how critical it is to fix.) this is why I feel there has to be
some kind of moderation. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I feel the default option for targeted release should be "in the future"
and at this time a moderator would look at the issue and either keep it at the
default milestone or move it to a more appropiate.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>How does everyone think about organizing the issue tracker, to get a better
overview of it all? this is just a mail to get the ball running please discuss
:)</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>/Stefan</DIV></DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML>