Ivan Krstic wrote:
Brion Vibber wrote:
If someone would like to commit to being Keeper
of the WikiBugs and
herd the necessary cats, then I'm all in favor of giving it a try.
I might be willing to take this on; I'd just like a sound understanding
of what cats you're specifically referring to herding. Other than the
keeptrack-assign-verify-close process, what else do you feel would need
to be done?
Some of the almost essential features of BugZilla include:
* Severity and/or priority
* Keywords (every BugZilla installation has a pre-defined set of them)
* Status (unconfirmed, new, assigned, resolved, verified, closed)
* Resolution (if the status is "resolved", was it "fixed",
"duplicate" (if so, of what other bug), "wontfix",
* SEARCHING! Searching for combinations of all of these criteria, plus
when a bug was last changed, when it was opened, by who, etc.etc.
Some of the not-so-essential-but-highly-useful features:
* CC lists. (Getting e-mailed with every change to a bug.)
* Even more SEARCHING! Complex queries for highly specific purposes.
I can't think of more for now, but there's probably more :-)
I can see all of these implementable in a Wiki (with e-mail CC lists
replaced by watchlists), EXCEPT FOR SEARCHING. Unfortunately, searching
is the most important of all. This is why I don't think it's feasible to
use a Wiki for this.
Of course, we could also have some sort of hybrid system. Discuss bugs
on the Wiki, but keep track of their status on BugZilla.
Just a suggestion,