X-Git-Url: https://sipb.mit.edu/gitweb.cgi/ikiwiki.git/blobdiff_plain/829d097dc52b6a8f50297406affc67fbc08dccb7..3ac2ae1f14952bd92038183d92b1eb618c9d0f55:/doc/todo/Better_bug_tracking_support.mdwn diff --git a/doc/todo/Better_bug_tracking_support.mdwn b/doc/todo/Better_bug_tracking_support.mdwn index 5bf8a95b2..1a810ad55 100644 --- a/doc/todo/Better_bug_tracking_support.mdwn +++ b/doc/todo/Better_bug_tracking_support.mdwn @@ -9,4 +9,63 @@ The support would not need to be anything fancy, assignment of bug numbers is perhaps the biggest thing missing when compared to a plain wiki page. Integration with the revision control system a la [scmbug](http://www.mkgnu.net/?q=scmbug) would really neat though, so that bug tracker commands like (closes: #nnn) could -be embedded to the source code repository commit messages. \ No newline at end of file +be embedded to the source code repository commit messages. + +> A while back I posted some thoughts in my blog about +> [using a wiki for issue tracking](http://kitenet.net/~joey/blog/entry/using_a_wiki_for_issue_tracking.html). +> Google's BTS also has some interesting developments along the lines of +> free-form search-based bug tracking, a style that seems a better fit to +> wikis than the traditional rigid data of a BTS. +> +> I sorta take your point about bug numbers. It can be a pain to refer to +> 'using_a_wiki_for_issue_tracking' as a bug name in a place like a +> changelog. + +>> Would a modified [[plugins/inline]] plugin that allowed new pages, but without a title field, be ok? +>> When you hit the edit button it just chooses a new number and makes a page with that +>> name. + +>> The only issue I can see with this is if you're using a distributed wiki for +>> distributed bug tracking. In that case you're going to have to make sure that you +>> don't get conflicting bug ids. +>> Maybe there should be two options - consecutive numbering, and uuid numbering +>> which uses a random (128 bit, base64 encoded = 22 chars) name. -- [[Will]] + +> OTOH, I don't see a need for specially formatted commit messages to be +> used to close bugs. Instead, if your BTS is kept in an ikiwiki wiki in +> an RCS along with your project, you can do like I do here, and just edit a +> bug's page, tag it `done`, and commit that along with the bug fix. +> +> --[[Joey]] + +>> I think a little bit more structure than in a normal wiki would be +>> good to have for bug tracking. Bug numbers, automatic timestamps on comments +>> and maybe an email interface would be nice. The resulting page may not +>> look like a wikipage anymore, but rather something like the Debian +>> BTS web-interface, but it would still benefit from wikilinks to the +>> documentation in the wiki etc. + +>>> I think it is useful to look at these things separately: +>>> +>>> * Bug numbers: See above. +>>> * Automatic timestamps on comments: this already exists with the inline directive. +>>> * Email interface: You can certainly get an rss feed of what changes in the wiki. +>>> * You didn't mention [[todo/structured_page_data]] but that is, I think, part +>>> of what you seem to be saying. +>>> * [[todo/tracking_bugs_with_dependencies]] is also important. +>>> +>>> -- [[Will]] + +>> About the commit message interface: I was thinking about a project +>> architecture where the code is kept in a separate revision control +>> system branch than the metadata (blog, wiki, BTS). This would IMHO +>> be a cleaner solution for distributing the source and making releases +>> etc. For this kind of setup, having the BTS scan the messages of the +>> source branch (by a commit-hook for example) would be useful. +>> +>> By Google BTS, do you mean the issue tracker in the Google code +>> project hosting? +>> +>> --Teemu + +[[wishlist]]