On 30.12.11 23:53 , Dr. Trigon wrote:
While you are mentioning this (btw. thanks for this) -
I had contact to
other people e.g. on dewiki which do also complain about JIRA no beeing
user friendly and so on - this should may be considered... But I am not
aware of how many low-level-users (regarding programming skills) are
actually reporting e.g. interwiki bot errors...
Hmm, did they say in what way it was not user friendly?
I have limited experience with it but only good. I have found it easier
to use and more robust than bugzilla, though not necessarily an easy
switch. I can see how a wikimedia editor who just wants to report a bug
might find it overwhelming and full use of sub-tasks and components and
the work flow and work history tools requires reading the documentation
for all but the most intuitive, but I didn't find filing a bug difficult
(and I'm almost certainly in your "low-level-users" at least as regards
any programming skill - though I am experienced with work flow and
project management concepts).
It seems well documented and easily linkable, not to mention it can be
tied directly to TS FishEye so I think we could easily post patches and
new proposed scripts to FishEye with complete back and forth linking to
the issues they go with on JIRA. This would then allow users, even
those who don't have commit access, to post their version controlled
code where others could tweak it, before it's committed to the wikimedia
Unlike either our current system or bugzilla, projects can be divided
into different "components" and issues can overlap. As far as I can
tell there is no need for junk like tracker bugs or keywords, though it
does have "labels" which are like keywords.
Valhallasw said he has a script to move the bugs with but maybe we could
try it out first without moving everything over.
TS-wiki (also integrated with JIRA/FishEye) is also available should we
need it for a more static tracking of plans. Though of course, moving
to JIRA does not mean we have to make use of TS-wiki or even FishEye.