How about a Gnus Bugzilla?

How about a Gnus Bugzilla?

[Steinar Bang]

Would it be a good idea to install a bugzilla on www.gnus.org, and use
it to track Gnus bugs and enhancement requests?

I think it would be a good idea.  Since www.gnus.org seems to be a
debian machine, installation of bugzilla basically consists of doing
	apt-get install bugzilla

Re: How about a Gnus Bugzilla?

[Xavier Maillard]

On 14 oct 2004, Steinar Bang wrote:

> Would it be a good idea to install a bugzilla on www.gnus.org,
> and use it to track Gnus bugs and enhancement requests?

Vote for: +1

> I think it would be a good idea. Since www.gnus.org seems to be
> a debian machine, installation of bugzilla basically consists
> of doing
> 	apt-get install bugzilla

I think it would be cool too, to be able to control bugzilla from
Gnus and to mirror stuff from the bugzilla from and to the
gnus-bug group -- ie. posting a bug report would be automatically
added from the gnus-bug group and so on...

Regards
-- 
No e-patents, pas de brevets logiciels
Pétition contre les brevets logiciels : http://petition.eurolinux.org

Re: How about a Gnus Bugzilla?

[Ted Zlatanov]

On Thu, 14 Oct 2004, zedek@gnu-rox.org wrote:

> I think it would be cool too, to be able to control bugzilla from
> Gnus and to mirror stuff from the bugzilla from and to the
> gnus-bug group -- ie. posting a bug report would be automatically
> added from the gnus-bug group and so on...

It's extra work to monitor and maintain Bugzilla for Gnus
contributors.  I have plenty to monitor with the 2 newsgroups and the
mailing list, so I'm not sure this is a good idea.  Maybe if it was
read-only for outside users, so contributors could decide if a bug
goes in.  I would hate to spend my day answering questions with
WORKSFORME and explanations like the Mozilla guys do.

Ted

Re: How about a Gnus Bugzilla?

[Steinar Bang]

>>>>> Xavier Maillard <zedek@gnu-rox.org>:

> I think it would be cool too, to be able to control bugzilla from
> Gnus and to mirror stuff from the bugzilla from and to the gnus-bug
> group -- ie. posting a bug report would be automatically added from
> the gnus-bug group and so on...

An nnzilla backend, perhaps?  I'm not sure I have an idea about how it
should behave, though.

Re: How about a Gnus Bugzilla?

[Steinar Bang]

>>>>> "Ted Zlatanov" <tzz@lifelogs.com>:

> It's extra work to monitor and maintain Bugzilla for Gnus
> contributors.  I have plenty to monitor with the 2 newsgroups and
> the mailing list, so I'm not sure this is a good idea.  Maybe if it
> was read-only for outside users, so contributors could decide if a
> bug goes in.  I would hate to spend my day answering questions with
> WORKSFORME and explanations like the Mozilla guys do.

The idea of a bugtracker is to track bugs in a traceable way, which,
as far as I can tell, bugzilla does really well.

In that context, I'm not sure I understand the problem you're
describing.  Could you perhaps elaborate on it?

Thanx!

Re: How about a Gnus Bugzilla?

[Reiner Steib]

On Thu, Oct 14 2004, Ted Zlatanov wrote:

> On Thu, 14 Oct 2004, zedek@gnu-rox.org wrote:
>
>> I think it would be cool too, to be able to control bugzilla from
>> Gnus and to mirror stuff from the bugzilla from and to the
>> gnus-bug group -- ie. posting a bug report would be automatically
>> added from the gnus-bug group and so on...
>
> It's extra work to monitor and maintain Bugzilla for Gnus
> contributors.  

ACK.

And it would be a *must* to be able to deal with it from Gnus (also
offline) and not thru a browser, IMHO.

It would be better to convince Lars to carry the `gnus-bug' group on
Gmane with some additional privacy protection (because of the user
settings) and an explaining text:

,----
| Your bug report will be posted to the Gnus Bug Group.
| The archive is available here:
| 
|   http://news.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.bugs
|   nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.bugs
`----

The additional privacy protection in `M-x gnus-bug RET' may include:

- (y-or-n-p "Encrypt mail address? ") ==> X-Archive: encrypt

  See http://gmane.org/tmda.php

- "Allow to show your report in Gnus Bugzilla? "
  ==> If no, add X-No-Archive header.

- ...

Bye, Reiner.
-- 
       ,,,
      (o o)
---ooO-(_)-Ooo---  |  PGP key available  |  http://rsteib.home.pages.de/

Re: How about a Gnus Bugzilla?

[Wes Hardaker]

>>>>> On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 21:12:28 +0200, Steinar Bang <sb@dod.no> said:

>>>>> Xavier Maillard <zedek@gnu-rox.org>:
>> I think it would be cool too, to be able to control bugzilla from
>> Gnus and to mirror stuff from the bugzilla from and to the gnus-bug
>> group -- ie. posting a bug report would be automatically added from
>> the gnus-bug group and so on...

Steinar> An nnzilla backend, perhaps?  I'm not sure I have an idea
Steinar> about how it should behave, though.

I have a nnsf (sourceforge) backend coded...  Recent html broke it,
however, but I liked it before I stopped having time to work on it...
I had every bug report for a given project listed as a summary item
and clicking on them would show the current status and the posts to
it.  It was nicer to use than the HTML interface (but didn't do
everything yet) and would significantly faster if the agent was used
though I never tried it.


-- 
"In the bathtub of history the truth is harder to hold than the soap,
 and much more difficult to find."  -- Terry Pratchett

Re: How about a Gnus Bugzilla?

[Xavier Maillard]

On 14 oct 2004, Reiner Steib wrote:

> On Thu, Oct 14 2004, Ted Zlatanov wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, 14 Oct 2004, zedek@gnu-rox.org wrote:
> > 
> > > I think it would be cool too, to be able to control
> > > bugzilla from Gnus and to mirror stuff from the bugzilla
> > > from and to the gnus-bug group -- ie. posting a bug report
> > > would be automatically added from the gnus-bug group and so
> > > on...
> > 
> > It's extra work to monitor and maintain Bugzilla for Gnus
> > contributors.  
> 
> ACK.
> 
> And it would be a *must* to be able to deal with it from Gnus
> (also offline) and not thru a browser, IMHO.

+1
 
> It would be better to convince Lars to carry the `gnus-bug'
> group on Gmane with some additional privacy protection (because
> of the user settings) and an explaining text:

Oh, yes, *please* do so. This will at least, remove all or part
of the spam from this group (10 or so per day).
 
> ,----
> > Your bug report will be posted to the Gnus Bug Group.
> > The archive is available here:
> > 
> > http://news.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.bugs
> > nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.bugs
> `----

Nice.
 
> The additional privacy protection in `M-x gnus-bug RET' may
> include:
> 
> - (y-or-n-p "Encrypt mail address? ") ==> X-Archive: encrypt
> 
> See http://gmane.org/tmda.php
> 
> - "Allow to show your report in Gnus Bugzilla? "
> ==> If no, add X-No-Archive header.

Interesting. Hmm speaking about Gmane, I don't remember what is
the corresponding Gmane group for gnus.ding, can you tell me ?
-- 
 In Gruuik we trust

Re: How about a Gnus Bugzilla?

[Jesper Harder]

Steinar Bang <sb@dod.no> writes:

> Would it be a good idea to install a bugzilla on www.gnus.org, and use
> it to track Gnus bugs and enhancement requests?

Is there a good Emacs interface to bugzilla?  If not, I won't be using
it -- bugzilla from a web browser is a PITA.

I've stopped contributing bug reports to projects that use bugzilla or
(even worse) sourceforge because the web based interface is just too
damn annoying and primitive.

The general idea of handling bug reports in a more structured way
might be nice, though.

-- 
Jesper Harder                                <http://purl.org/harder/>

Re: How about a Gnus Bugzilla?

[Steinar Bang]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 474 bytes --]

>>>>> Wes Hardaker <wes@hardakers.net>:

>>>>> On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 21:12:28 +0200, Steinar Bang <sb@dod.no> said:

Steinar> An nnzilla backend, perhaps?  I'm not sure I have an idea
Steinar> about how it should behave, though.

> I have a nnsf (sourceforge) backend coded...  Recent html broke it,
> however, but I liked it before I stopped having time to work on it...

Bugzilla has an XML output, that may be easier to use, and to ad-hoc
parse XML.  The DTD is attached.


[-- Attachment #2: Bugzilla XML format DTD --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 1851 bytes --]

<!-- Avoid having PSGML complain about these being undefined -->
<!ENTITY amp	"&#x0026;"> <!-- AMPERSAND -->
<!ENTITY lt	"&#x0060;"> <!-- LESS-THAN SIGN -->
<!ENTITY gt	"&#x003E;"> <!-- GREATER-THAN SIGN -->

<!ELEMENT bugzilla (bug+)>
<!ATTLIST bugzilla
	version CDATA #REQUIRED
	urlbase CDATA #REQUIRED
	maintainer CDATA #REQUIRED
	exporter CDATA #IMPLIED
>
<!ELEMENT bug (bug_id, (bug_status, product, priority, version, rep_platform, assigned_to, delta_ts, component, reporter, target_milestone?, bug_severity, creation_ts, qa_contact?, op_sys, resolution?, bug_file_loc?, short_desc?, keywords*, status_whiteboard?, dependson*, blocks*, cc*, long_desc*, attachment*)?)>
<!ATTLIST bug
	error (NotFound | NotPermitted | InvalidBugId) #IMPLIED
>
<!ELEMENT bug_id (#PCDATA)>
<!ELEMENT exporter (#PCDATA)>
<!ELEMENT urlbase (#PCDATA)>
<!ELEMENT bug_status (#PCDATA)>
<!ELEMENT product (#PCDATA)>
<!ELEMENT priority (#PCDATA)>
<!ELEMENT version (#PCDATA)>
<!ELEMENT rep_platform (#PCDATA)>
<!ELEMENT assigned_to (#PCDATA)>
<!ELEMENT delta_ts (#PCDATA)>
<!ELEMENT component (#PCDATA)>
<!ELEMENT reporter (#PCDATA)>
<!ELEMENT target_milestone (#PCDATA)>
<!ELEMENT bug_severity (#PCDATA)>
<!ELEMENT creation_ts (#PCDATA)>
<!ELEMENT qa_contact (#PCDATA)>
<!ELEMENT status_whiteboard (#PCDATA)>
<!ELEMENT op_sys (#PCDATA)>
<!ELEMENT resolution (#PCDATA)>
<!ELEMENT bug_file_loc (#PCDATA)>
<!ELEMENT short_desc (#PCDATA)>
<!ELEMENT keywords (#PCDATA)>
<!ELEMENT dependson (#PCDATA)>
<!ELEMENT blocks (#PCDATA)>
<!ELEMENT cc (#PCDATA)>
<!ELEMENT long_desc (who, bug_when, thetext)>
<!ELEMENT who (#PCDATA)>
<!ELEMENT bug_when (#PCDATA)>
<!ELEMENT thetext (#PCDATA)>
<!ELEMENT attachment (attachid, date, desc, type?, data?)>
<!ELEMENT attachid (#PCDATA)>
<!ELEMENT date (#PCDATA)>
<!ELEMENT desc (#PCDATA)>
<!ELEMENT type (#PCDATA)>
<!ELEMENT data (#PCDATA)>

Re: How about a Gnus Bugzilla?

[Steinar Bang]

>>>>> Jesper Harder <harder@ifa.au.dk>:

> Is there a good Emacs interface to bugzilla?  If not, I won't be using
> it -- bugzilla from a web browser is a PITA.

> I've stopped contributing bug reports to projects that use bugzilla
> or (even worse) sourceforge because the web based interface is just
> too damn annoying and primitive.

IMO, bugzilla isn't too bad as web UIs go.  I have _seen_ bad, and
bugzilla doesn't even come close.  But I see your point.

> The general idea of handling bug reports in a more structured way
> might be nice, though.

That's what triggered it for me.

I usually post enhancement requests here, and outright, reproducable,
bugs on gnus-bug.  When I'm not sure if it's a bug or not, I keep a
little conversation with myself here, and hope that a developer picks
it up, if it actually turns up or not.

But there's a feeling that things are lost in the noise from general
discussion.  There are things that have been debated earlier that
keeps popping up again.

Re: How about a Gnus Bugzilla?

[Adam Sjøgren]

On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 23:31:40 +0200, Xavier wrote:

> Hmm speaking about Gmane, I don't remember what is the corresponding
> Gmane group for gnus.ding, can you tell me ?

<http://gmane.org/info.php?group=gmane.emacs.gnus.general>


  Best regards,

-- 
 "Vad gör dom på dagis i Övik?"                               Adam Sjøgren
                                                         asjo@koldfront.dk

Re: How about a Gnus Bugzilla?

[Ted Zlatanov]

On Thu, 14 Oct 2004, sb@dod.no wrote:

>>>>>> "Ted Zlatanov" <tzz@lifelogs.com>:
> 
>> It's extra work to monitor and maintain Bugzilla for Gnus
>> contributors.  I have plenty to monitor with the 2 newsgroups and
>> the mailing list, so I'm not sure this is a good idea.  Maybe if it
>> was read-only for outside users, so contributors could decide if a
>> bug goes in.  I would hate to spend my day answering questions with
>> WORKSFORME and explanations like the Mozilla guys do.
> 
> The idea of a bugtracker is to track bugs in a traceable way, which,
> as far as I can tell, bugzilla does really well.
> 
> In that context, I'm not sure I understand the problem you're
> describing.  Could you perhaps elaborate on it?

You are forgetting the bug submission process.  I don't want every
Gnus user to submit bugs, only developers and qualified users.  In the
Mozilla project, a lot of the bugs are things that the user simply
doesn't understand.  If I take the burden of tracking bugs, I want to
make sure they are real and not something best answered in the other
Gnus forums.

Just my 5 cents.

Ted

Re: How about a Gnus Bugzilla?

[Steinar Bang]

>>>>> "Ted Zlatanov" <tzz@lifelogs.com>:

> You are forgetting the bug submission process.  I don't want every
> Gnus user to submit bugs, only developers and qualified users.

Are there other than qualified users of Gnus left?

I mean, I don't want to give it up, but I don't want to try making
anyone else use it (anymore).  "Brent barn skyr ilden!", as the saying
goes.

Re: How about a Gnus Bugzilla?

[Xavier Maillard]

On 15 oct 2004, Adam Sjøgren wrote:

> On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 23:31:40 +0200, Xavier wrote:
> 
> > Hmm speaking about Gmane, I don't remember what is the
> > corresponding Gmane group for gnus.ding, can you tell me ?
> 
> <http://gmane.org/info.php?group=gmane.emacs.gnus.general>

Thank you.

-- 
      Xavier Maillard| "Stand Back! I'm a programmer!"
.0.             zedek@gnu-rox.orgz|
..0             (+33) 326 770 221 |   Webmaster, emacsfr.org
000              PGP : 0x1E028EA5 |    Membre de l' APRIL

Re: How about a Gnus Bugzilla?

[Bjørn Mork]

Steinar Bang <sb@dod.no> writes:
>>>>>> "Ted Zlatanov" <tzz@lifelogs.com>:
>
>> You are forgetting the bug submission process.  I don't want every
>> Gnus user to submit bugs, only developers and qualified users.
>
> Are there other than qualified users of Gnus left?

well, there's me...

> I mean, I don't want to give it up, but I don't want to try making
> anyone else use it (anymore).  "Brent barn skyr ilden!", as the saying
> goes.

"Brent barn lukter vondt"


Bjørn
-- 
You're probably dead yourself.