On Sat, Feb 10, 2018 at 12:05 AM, Marcus <marcus.mail@wtnet.de> wrote:
> Am 09.02.2018 um 01:19 schrieb Patricia Shanahan:
>
>> On February 8, 2018, at 5:51 AM, Peter Kovacs <Petko@Apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> # Start spreading knowledge in our development team.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> 1) I would like to propose a Product Backlog / OIL (OpenIssue) List
>>>>> to priorize Issues we need to work on. The most Valueable item comes
>>>>> to the top, the least to the bottom. What Value exactly is is up to
>>>>> discussion.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Theoretically, we have a list of issues in Bugzilla with target 4.2.0.
>>>> Validating them all and/or setting targets will basically give you
>>>> what you wish. I think Bugzilla has some concept of an issue weight
>>>> that would more or less allow to prioritize issues with the current
>>>> tooling, so this can be done. At least, once we agree on list on a
>>>> series of "must-haves" for 4.2.0, these could be turned into something
>>>> similar to your backlog.
>>>>
>>> Maybe we should not discuss tooling now. I think in the end it has to
>>> work. Jira is mostly a convenient choice. But we can think of all other
>>> sort of combinations. (However we have already a lot of Tools.So I would
>>> rather try to reduce those. We can try Bugzilla, but i do not want to
>>> start modifying Bugzilla in order to get what we need.
>>>
>>
>> I would prefer to avoid the upheaval of switching to a different issue
>> tracker if at all possible.
>>
>
> +1
>
> Jira is just another tool that wouldn't bring us any nearer to closed
> issues. BTW, start new? Then you would trash all old issues which isn't a
> good thing. Move them over to Jira? Great, who is the volunteer to do the
> migration? ;-)
>
>
>
+1 to that. We have Bugzilla bug numbers in SVN and even in the code, and
links to Bugzilla URLs in places too, who is going to find and replace all
of those?
I also find Bugzilla much faster to work with and lighter on the network
(not everyone is in a 1st world country).
Damjan
|