Sounds good, then Massimo it is :) I can setup a proposed branching
structure with a clone of the latest code line (where hopefully folks
will jump in and throw rocks at it so it modified if needed to better
resolve initial issue). I can also look into into the Google-2-
mercurial API and see where we can wrap it up and make less of a pain
to use (i did this recently with Perforce where users' habits needed
to be directed a little). Or maybe you think of something more
pressing from comments in the thread?

Mart :)

On Aug 29, 1:53 am, mdipierro <mdipie...@cs.depaul.edu> wrote:
> I'll take a patch to improve admin with the suggested changes.
>
> Massimo
>
> p.s. Call me Massimo. My students usually do so too.
>
> On Aug 29, 12:48 am, mart <msenecal...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Good idea! Would be awsome! Probably a bug tracking system should be
> > still need to be added though, for a few reasons (just my opinion
> > though). If we go back to the root issue of the thread (or rather what
> > turned out to be the defining issue to resolve), 2 separate things
> > seem have been deemed as "in need of change" (well, 3 really).
>
> > 1. Professor Di Pierro would like to retain control over adding
> > patches, updates, features & bug fixes into the "main code line" while
> > not having to enter/explain-how/modify(correct) bug information. He
> > would like to spend the time fixing the issues a opposed to managing
> > the ins and outs. By creating a bug/ticket system with web2py, a few
> > very positive benefits are achieved: ease of integration to build
> > system/release deliveries with solid build notes wrt bug included bug
> > status (provided that too be done with a web2py flavor), tight control
> > over the bug data itself (I.e. easy of bug history retrieval for bug
> > validation, authentication which may prove useful if at some point it
> > becomes necessary to implement bug/user filtering if Prf. Di Pierro
> > decides to hand off some of this workload)). Oh and a great benefit
> > (IMHO), showcasing an "in production system" built on the featured
> > technology is always well viewed. Providing as many opportunities of
> > web2py users to register (obviously without appearing overly eager can
> > be a good thing, as you mention)
>
> > 2. A change in structure may prove useful with the initial thread
> > subject (move forward with testing iteration while continuing on with
> > development efforts). Done correctly, by applying predictable patterns
> > in the structure a "made to fit" bug/ticketing system could be made a
> > little more intuitive and productive than the current Google-ish
> > offering. If we can imagine all the desired functionality baked into
> > exiting release & testing infrastructures, release cycles become much
> > more efficient and consistent. As the guy managing releases where I
> > work, I can say that consistency and repeatability of process goes a
> > long way, and in this case Prf. Di Pierro is taking a lot on his
> > shoulders which is a good thing for the web2py world, but
> > understandably things could and should be easier for him given the
> > current model.
>
> > At This point, would be a good thing to take this to next level and
> > begin planning and focused activity around this (with prf. Di Pierro's
> > initial ask as the areas of focus). Any takers?
>
> > @ Michele: still interested in heading the efforts ? ;)
>
> > Mart :)
>
> > On Aug 28, 5:34 am, Phyo Arkar <phyo.arkarl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > That way
>
> > > 1) Encourage users more into web2py group
> > > 2) Users can just jump into conversation and work onto bug fixes too.
> > > 3) If thers google api which allows user to login and post directly to
> > > google group , users can submit bug/questions directly there via
> > > admin.
>
> > > On 8/28/10, Phyo Arkar <phyo.arkarl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > sorry i mean
>
> > > > Put subject Tagged [web2py] [bug] at the top of the list?
>
> > > > On 8/28/10, Phyo Arkar <phyo.arkarl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >> regarding bug-tracking , i have a very simple idea.
>
> > > >> how about , before we develop the bug-tracking system , at app admin ,
> > > >> add a side box , just like
> > > >> web2py Recent Tweets box , add
> > > >> web2py Google Group box ?
>
> > > >> Is there Google Group api which can get all the list of subjects? and
> > > >> put subject tagged [web2py] [bug]
>
> > > >> or how about iframe directly to Google Group?
>
> > > >> On 8/27/10, mart <msenecal...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>> I'm thinking a few possibilities...
>
> > > >>> we can, as a possible option, give folks the opportunity to either
> > > >>> register there install of web2py with additional user registration
> > > >>> option (depending of your philosophy wrt that) - which could also
> > > >>> serve as tracking mechanism to encourage people to keep up with
> > > >>> updates (i.e. Flash screen: "you are on version 1.62. Latest stable
> > > >>> release is 1.84. Would you like to update now? y/n/"). Or maybe offer
> > > >>> the option to register as a web2py user only (which may help augment
> > > >>> numbers). Perhaps users can be motivated to register? For example
> > > >>> "register and get access to the web2py community, ask questions, get
> > > >>> real case answers, LOG bugs, etc. which would be a hard requirement
> > > >>> for this type of activity)
>
> > > >>> registration:
> > > >>> * install/user registration on install (I.e. .msi on windows)
> > > >>> * on launch of app admin
> > > >>> * on error? (I.e. Exception is thrown, user can be prompted to send
> > > >>> error to web2py.com db.errors to 1) report the problem b) if issue can
> > > >>> be figured out automatically like one I seem to be getting lately
> > > >>> where AMF fails on import (missing class) when I could actually see
> > > >>> it ;) - just as an example :)) then 2) the system can return
> > > >>> resolution if available, or automatically log a ticket (oh, and while
> > > >>> were there, why not offer the option of registration?)
> > > >>> * obviously on launch of "web2py bug tracker"
> > > >>> * on web2py software update
> > > >>> * maybe a nice feature when installing one of those cool fee apps,
> > > >>> user gets prompted with option to register
> > > >>> * etc...
>
> > > >>> I think there are many ways to get user attention to register with
> > > >>> valid Google account for reducing the risk of spam with bug logging
> > > >>> (and can have a bit of value add as well - again if inline with your
> > > >>> web2py philosophy). web2py already has great authentication
> > > >>> capabilities with variety and ease, leveraging that should be do-able?
>
> > > >>> Also, i assume it should also be possible to query Google DB for user
> > > >>> authentication, if not user validation is done through web2py.com?
>
> > > >>> Mart :)
>
> > > >>> On Aug 26, 7:23 pm, mdipierro <mdipie...@cs.depaul.edu> wrote:
> > > >>>> This is reasonable but how to check?
>
> > > >>>> On Aug 26, 6:18 pm, mart <msenecal...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > >>>> > Interesting point... How about bugs can only be "truly submitted" 
> > > >>>> > if
> > > >>>> > user is registered in web2py user group? Can we up authentication
> > > >>>> > detail for users (if required)... True that it could be scary that
> > > >>>> > folks start logging bugs left and right... If part of user group,
> > > >>>> > would this only generate same amount of traffic?
>
> > > >>>> > Mart :)
>
> > > >>>> > On Aug 26, 4:56 pm, Michele Comitini <michele.comit...@gmail.com>
> > > >>>> > wrote:
>
> > > >>>> > > some thoughts...
>
> > > >>>> > > Firstly it is important that tickets reach their fate (closed, 
> > > >>>> > > wont
> > > >>>> > > fix, cant fix, not a bug, whatever ) soon, otherwise
> > > >>>> > > it would be worst than people writing for bugs already fixed. You
> > > >>>> > > can
> > > >>>> > > see many projects that have 3 year old tickets...
> > > >>>> > > This means that some individuals should handle the task of 
> > > >>>> > > keeping
> > > >>>> > > an
> > > >>>> > > eye on tickets that stall and take actions.
> > > >>>> > > Secondly I would suggest that we put down a little howto on
> > > >>>> > > reporting
> > > >>>> > > bugs. Short,  no one reads it otherwise. ;-)
> > > >>>> > > The answer to a user signalling something that sounds as a bug
> > > >>>> > > could
> > > >>>> > > be, "please read web2py.com/bugshowto and report the problem,
> > > >>>> > > thanks!".
>
> > > >>>> > > I like the remote thing, but should it require a captha or 
> > > >>>> > > similar,
> > > >>>> > > to
> > > >>>> > > avoid spammers and
> > > >>>> > > to make clear to the sender that something is going out of its
> > > >>>> > > machine?
> > > >>>> > > Else it would look much like those desktop applications  that ask
> > > >>>> > > you
> > > >>>> > > to send info to someone you
> > > >>>> > > do not know, not only, you do not even know what data is going to
> > > >>>> > > be
> > > >>>> > > sent! Just "YES" or "NO"! Scaring stuff! ;-)
> > > >>>> > > Those ticket could contain really sensitive data!
> > > >>>> > > Has anyone already managed a similar situation? please speakup!
>
> > > >>>> > > mic
>
> > > >>>> > > 2010/8/26 mart <msenecal...@gmail.com>:
>
> > > >>>> > > > good plan! Do you have people dedicated to test purposes for 
> > > >>>> > > > the
> > > >>>> > > > monitoring help? Were you thinking on a something like a 2 tier
> > > >>>> > > > filtering system? first level bug validation (is this really a
> > > >>>> > > > new
> > > >>>> > > > bug?) as automated filtering & second: trusted testers/dev 
> > > >>>> > > > folks
> > > >>>> > > > who
> > > >>>> > > > can best help in filtering and pass best info to you?
>
> > > >>>> > > > open a web2py ticket from the admin! Very innovative! Lots of
> > > >>>> > > > possibilities there! :).
>
> > > >>>> > > > Also, do let me know if you would like to look at (or have
> > > >>>> > > > thoughts
> > > >>>> > > > on) branching strategies as a means to allow testing phases 
> > > >>>> > > > while
> > > >>>> > > > continuing with on going development.
>
> > > >>>> > > > Thanks,
> > > >>>> > > > Mart :)
>
> > > >>>> > > > On Aug 26, 8:57 am, mdipierro <mdipie...@cs.depaul.edu> wrote:
> > > >>>> > > >> I am in favor of both proposals
>
> > > >>>> > > >> 1) user google code more
> > > >>>> > > >> 2) having a bug tracking application
>
> > > >>>> > > >> but
> > > >>>> > > >> - I would like some help in monitoring this list and opening
> > > >>>> > > >> bugs
> > > >>>> > > >> on
> > > >>>> > > >> google code when a new bug is suggested on the list. This is
> > > >>>> > > >> because I
> > > >>>> > > >> do not want to have to explain to new users how to open google
> > > >>>> > > >> code
> > > >>>> > > >> tickets and I do not want to have to open them myself (i.e.
>
> ...
>
> read more »

Reply via email to