kicad-developers team mailing list archive
Mailing list archive
Re: I have a request in to convert sourceforge bug database.
On 4/9/2010 10:24 AM, Dick Hollenbeck wrote:
> Wayne Stambaugh wrote:
>> On 4/9/2010 3:52 AM, Dick Hollenbeck wrote:
>> > FYI:
>> > Don't know how useful all these old, resolved bug are, but the new
>> > ones are important.
>> > https://answers.launchpad.net/malone/+question/106874
>> > Any new sourceforge bugs coming in may get lost, do you think I
>> > should shut down the old tracker now?
>> I think you should shut it down to prevent any gaps in the bug
>> reporting and to save yourself some work.
> Done. Just before doing that I did another snapshot and put it into the
> source repo under Documentation/kicad_export.xml
>> Can you put a link on the sourceforge bug tracker to point to the
>> launchpad bug tacker?
> No, I think the tracker tab is gone entirely now, and with it the webpage.
The bug tracker page is now gone as is the feature request page.
>> If you decide to shut it down, I'll change the bug reporting link on
>> the Kicad wiki to point to the Launchpad bug tracker.
> Thanks for that.
Done. I will remove the feature request link since it's gone.
>> I probably should also add a note to the developers page that the
>> Kicad development resources are now hosted at launchpad. The only
>> question I have is how does launchpad handle feature requests. I
>> don't see any where in launchpad to track feature requests. Do
>> sourceforge feature requests map to blueprints (seems like overkill)
>> or bug reports on launchpad?
> These are good questions, and they need to be answered almost within the
> hour. The launchpad guy is standing by ready to import a file named
> output.xml, which is extracted from kicad_export.xml, but the darn files
> are so big that I cannot tell if the converting tool (kicad_export.xml
> to output.xml) is including the feature requests or only the bugs. If
> we don't get a handle on this soon, the issue will be answered for us.
> I also have some reluctance to even keep old *closed* bug reports. What
> do you think?
The closed bug reports may be helpful for folks who may submit a bug
report for a bug that has already been submitted. Although, this
assumes that the submitter will check to see if the bug has already been
submitted. I was triaging bug reports yesterday and my experience would
suggest that this may be wishful thinking. There are a significant
number of duplicate bug reports.
> Here is the conversion program I used:
> Does this program keep "Feature Requests" in the output or not?
Given the similarity between the bug reporting and feature request pages
on SourceForge, it may be that the feature requests were part of the
same database and got pulled in by your conversion program. The best
way to find this out may be to see what gets pulled into the launchpad
bug tracker rather than try to determine that by sifting through a huge
> Do we want them there, in the bug database?
That is not an easy question to answer. There is not a clean one-to-one
mapping of concepts between SourceForge and Launchpad. For example
there was a feature request for the component library editor to support
rotating using the 'r' hot key (which I closed since it is already
fixed). Does this feature request really need a blueprint? Probably
not. It could just as well been a bug report although not technically a
bug. On the other hand, there is a feature request to add line and
cross style grid display. This seems like an ideal candidate for a
blueprint. We may have to live with some of these items getting lost in
the shuffle or hand sorting them as we find them. It would be nice if
we could send out a mass email to let everyone submitted a bug report or
feature request know that we have moved the project to launchpad and
some of the bugs and feature requests may have been lost in the move.
This may be more work than it's worth. At the very least we can put a
message on the Wiki and post a message to the users group.