[Zope3-dev] "Core" topic in Collector

[Christian Theune]

Hi,

Jim Fulton wrote:
> Christian Theune wrote:
>> Jim Fulton wrote:
> ...
>>>> Is it what needs to be fixed before a release?
>>> I think "core" is largely is a meaningless label in a system, the  
>>> collector where we collect too much information already.
>> Hmm. Would that mean we should provide better different labels in the
>> collector?
> 
> IMO, we should collect less data. A common design mistake is to make
> systems over complicated, including forms that collect too much data.
> The Zope3 collector isn't actually *that* bad in this respect.  IMO,
> it could do without the topic and version info fields.

Ah. By less data you didn't mean less issues/bugs but less qualified
data fields. Hmm. At least I agree if that means less *required* fields.
And the current collector isn't very bad in that, I agree too.

The topic could probably go away, and maybe we could also remove some of
the options from the classification.

(I bet that "issue", "feature", "bug", "bug+solution" would be enough,
maybe "feature+solution" but I don't like the "+solution" very much.)

>> Didn't we start some discussion a while ago about moving away from them?
>> Does someone have this project on his radar still?
> 
> Yawn.  IMO, the collect, despite it's flaws, isn't bad enough to
> spend time on, especially given other priorities. OTOH, I'd be happy
> to just switch to using Launchpad, which would require basically no
> effort, especially if we don't bother transferring old collector data.

I'm sorry to bore you with that, but I didn't notice that we had a
definite outcome of the last discussion. This also goes into what
Martijn said the last time:

http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.zope.zope3/18957/focus=18957

I'd be happy using launchpad too. The last link points to a discussion
that didn't have any decision in the end. I wouldn't go as far as
abandoning the old collector data.

They have an XMLRPC API available for filing bugs, maybe they have a
simple import mechanism to get our existing data over.

(Ok, so these last sentences might spur two discussions: again the
collector issue which we didn't resolve the last time. The second issue:
a central place for decisions to look up.)

>>> Anyway, wfmc isn't included in and therefore doesn't affect releases.
>> K, that's enough for me to ignore the one bug then. ;) You mind if I put
>> off the meaningless 'core' label for now so I can manage the bugs a bit
>> better?
> 
> I don't know what you mean by "put off".  I'd be happy to change
> the topic options.  Or, perhaps change it to have one topic: "Ignore this field".

I meant to say that I wanted to remove the 'core' label from that
specific bug to make it stay out of my query for the things we need to
tackle for a 3.3.1.

PS: I'll start using the importance '3.3 release'  as a 'whatever next
release in the 3.3 branch is to happen'-marker.

Christian

-- 
gocept gmbh & co. kg - forsterstraße 29 - 06112 halle/saale - germany
www.gocept.com - ct at gocept.com - phone +49 345 122 9889 7 -
fax +49 345 122 9889 1 - zope and plone consulting and development


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 252 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope3-dev/attachments/20061215/177d7907/signature-0001.bin