[Gnumed-devel] Re: GNUmed & blueprints

[Gour]

>>>>> "James" == James Busser <address@hidden> writes:

Hello James!

James> Splitting the contributions into different streams, which will
James> live in different areas, in one way. Doing so may make things
James> easier to find, and may reduce exposure to things that are of
James> less interest.

Right.

James> The above would also not address the volume, if some find (some
James> of) the volume to be too much or not useful or least not of
James> interest to them.

It's not question of the 'usefulness' but more about 'priorities'.

When you don't have enough time, then it's easier if e.g. all the bug
reports are going as tickets to the tracker, ideas for new features are
in 'blueprints' etc. meaning one can go there separately and take a
look, leaving the mailing for the rest of discussions.

However, now everything - handling of bug-reports, usability problems,
request for new features... - is in the same 'inbox' :-(

Finally, we created GNUmed team and GNUmed project at LP to use those
features, not to just increase number of projects there :-) 

James> Some, like myself, might limit some postings to private
James> email. Posting to the list only at intervals, with progress, or
James> questions, is possible,

I would not like that my email would be reason for you to post private
emails - it is better that you e.g. use 'Answers' on LP contributing to
GNUmed's knowledge base tat LP.


James> The alternative would be for individuals to apply smart filters
James> to their inboxes. This would cater to the fact that the postings
James> of some people (perhaps me) may be of less of interest than those
James> of others...

Again, it's not that someone's posts are less interesting, but
"everything in one bag' is harder to track properly.

It's not coincidence that e.g. many devs do not like to use IRC for
handling feature requests and/or bug reports 'cause many good ideas are
simply lost in the IRC-noise and therefore insist on opening separate
tickets at bug-trackers.

James> Ar minimum, might it be worth sending the bugs generated by the
James> client to a different list? That might make it easier for such
James> bugs to get monitored, *provided* it was not primarily Karsten
James> needing to look in "that other" place.

I would say that if the Karsten is the only one to take a look, I would
consider that it is even more important to 'clean' the list from those
bug reports disturbing other regular users ;) and to have tickets opened
for different issues than bunch of emails with <bug>: in the subject
line.

James> If anyone could commit to monitoring bug reports, maybe we
James> *could* alter upcoming clients so that the reports would
James> gradually divert to some alternative list. Whoever would be
James> monitoring could run new bugs past Karsten and log them into the
James> bug tracker whereas known bugs and any solution could be
James> communicated to the sender of they identified themselves.

We already have bug tracker at LP which is accessible via web an via
email and to which every member of GNUmed team can easily subscribe to.

See e.g. https://bugs.launchpad.net/gnumed/+bug/263499


Sincerely,
Gour


-- 

Gour  | Zagreb, Croatia  | GPG key: C6E7162D
----------------------------------------------------------------

pgpQnTK3iZegx.pgp
Description: PGP signature