bugs.kde.org -> bugzilla??
sanders at kde.org
Mon Aug 19 08:48:24 BST 2002
Hi Coolo, Daniel, others,
As I mentioned on the KMail list I can't make productive use of the
bug system anymore. (Demands for help have outstripped supply of my
I hope I would be able to use the system productively again if the bug
system supported voting. (Technical and moral considerations are
important but those being equal I would prefer to allocate my time to
areas that are most demanded by users). So my "other input" is if the
bug system is to be improved then please add support for voting,
perhaps this is a no brainer as IIRC bugzilla already supports
I'm also pro allowing users to vote with money. That is actually pay
money (shock horror) to encourage developers to fix bugs and
implement features. Basically being a capitalist I consider money to
be a significant indicator of how much demand there is for work to be
I don't see any insurmountable technical problems with allowing users
to vote with money. Payments can be made in advance, and allocated
towards a particular bug#. Payments are donations and do not
guarantee work will be accomplished. Kept a track of which developer
closes which bug (probably the bug system already does this).
The feedback I've received is that developers would be insulted if
this money was given directly to them, but it could still be put to
good use by donating it to worthy charities. Maybe KDE e.V. or better
yet developers could choose their own charity from a list. I'm sure
we could agree on at least a few worthy causes, other projects have
(try ":help uganda" in vim).
Having a bug system that supports voting would help me (and hopefully
others) set my priorities, having KDE donate to worthy charities
could be good PR, and would just be a nice thing to do.
On Sunday 18 August 2002 21:05, Stephan Kulow wrote:
> I'm currently evaluating the use of bugzilla at
> Our current bug system is an early fork of the
> debian bug system, which has been developed
> a lot since then. The problems with our current
> approach are massive:
> all bugs are stored in one directory three files
> per bug (and you know yourself how many bugs
> we have), which makes accesses to it very slow.
> the HTML pages are staticly generated by a process
> that runs all couple of hours making it hard to say
> if a bug is closed after you wrote a mail.
> we needed kbugbuster to have a useful interface to
> our bug system as the web interface itself is only
> read only. So we got the great kbugbuster to work
> around that weakness
> you can't query bugs. Daniel did a great job finetuning
> htdig, but you can't query e.g. grave bugs of konqueror,
> kio, kio_http. You have to click a lot to get that.
> Or something simple as: all bugs reported by
> coolo at kde.org, that are still open.
> the TODO list Dirk added isn't used, as it adds another layer
> on top of the bug system and isn't really integrated.
> the bug system isn't really maintained as it is.
> from my look at bugzilla, it seems to solve all this. At some
> parts it appears as a shift of pradigmas, but I hope it will
> make us much more productive as the introduction of
> kbugbuster did.
> As I said, the debian bug system has changed since then
> a lot too, so changing to the new version would solve some
> of our problems too, but not all of them and changing from the
> old DBTS to the new one is the same amount of work than
> to change to completly different BTS.
> My question now is: did someone else notice that my lines
> got longer and longer as I write? :)
> Do you have other input? I guess, most of you have no
> idea how our current bug system looks like internally, so it
> will be mostly about using BTSs - please tell me, but leave
> out emotions if you can ;)
> Greetings, Stephan
More information about the kde-core-devel