Amarok components in Bugzilla and how to improve this

[Myriam Schweingruber]

Hi all,

currently, we have the following components in bugzilla:

* AFT: Bugs and whishes related to Amarok File Tracking (0 open reports)
* Collection: Bugs and wishes related to the database and scanning
process (28 open reports)
* CollectionBrowser: For bugs and whishes related to the Collection
Browser (38 open reports)
* ContextView: For bugs and wishes related to the Context View applet
pane (22 open reports, default CC: Leo Franchi)
* DAAP: Bugs and whishes related to daap. (2 open reports)
* Documentation: All documentation related issues, like typos, missing
elements, etc. (0 reports)
* DynamicPlaylists: Bugs relating to the creation, population or
management of Dynamic playlists.  (15 open reports)
* Engines: Bugs pertaining to the engines. (6 open reports)
* FileBrowser: For bugs and whishes related to the File Browser (7 open reports)
* general: All reports that go in no specific category  (this is the
default, 300+ open reports)
* Mediabrowser: For bugs and wishes transferring music to your
portable music device. (24 open reports)
* Organizer: Bugs and wishes related to the "Organize Files Dialog" (0
open reports)
* OSD: For bugs and whishes related to the On Screen Display (7 open reports)
* Playlist: Bugs and whishes related to the (main) playlist. (49 open reports)
* Podcast: Podcast related bug reports (7 open reports, default CC:
Bart Cerneels)
* SavedPlaylists: Bugs pertaining to the playlistbrowser. (8 open
reports, default CC: Bart Cerneels)
* ScriptManager: Reports about the Amarok script manager and bundled
Amarok scripts. Do not report bugs relating to third-party scripts,
please contact the author. (12 open reports)
* ServiceBrowser: Bugs and wishes related to the internet services
components (10 open reports)
* TagDialog: id3 tag editor (1 open report)
* Usability: Container for all bugs/wishes that are usability issues
(0 open reports)

Where open reports means both bugs and wishes. Of course, as you can
see from the amount of reports in general, this still needs a lot of
filtering, especially in the wishlist.
I added Documentation, Organizer and Usability recently, please tell
me what you think, especially Usability might not necessarily the best
solution, since it takes away the focus from the real element. I think
it is necessary to be able to flag usability issues though, but the
flags option seems too obscure to be really usable (and apparently no
project uses them AFAICS).

Some of these components are either underused if not used at all, some
could be improved, either in their description or by adding new
components to allow a more detailed filtering. Bart suggested new
components in the past on several occasions, and I think it could
really help filtering our bugs and wishes list.
Currently, only very few of these components have default assignees,
it could be helpful to add those who actually wish to get notified
immediately.

Please all, tell me what you think, what improvements would be
appropriate, what is obsolte, etc.

Also I would be grateful if you all could have a look at the wishlist,
since I am sure there are a lot of already implemented features lying
around that we forgot to close. I am going through the wishes with
release numbers to put those up to date, but with almost 400 wishes
there is a lot of work.

As a reminder, we have the following queries available, which you can
also add to your bugs list through that link:
https://bugs.kde.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=saved-searches

http://tinyurl.com/allamarokbugs, called AmarokBugs in the saved searches,
http://tinyurl.com/amarok2assigned (including those waiting for info
for backtraces), called AllAmarokBugs in the saved searches,
http://tinyurl.com/wishlist2assigned, called AmarokWishlist in the
saved searches.

as well as the queries for the release-blocker and the 2.2.2 targets.


Thanks in advance for your help and suggestions.


Regards, Myriam.
-- 
Protect your freedom and join the Fellowship of FSFE:
http://www.fsfe.org
Please don't send me proprietary file formats,
use ISO standard ODF instead (ISO/IEC 26300)