Defining the Maemo Bugzilla scope

The Maemo Bugzilla scope

Currently Maemo Bugzilla is used as a bug tracking system for the “core” software elements shipped in the Maemo platform (to define the term “Maemo” itself, please see this discussion). This includes both Open source and Closed source components preinstalled on the devices by Nokia. Obviously this does not include stuff like Skype or Rhapsody – they have their own bugtrackers.

And there is Garage Tracker. It is the bugtracking system for all those products based on the Maemo stack, but not preinstalled on the devices by Nokia.

In my opinion and in the long run, Garage tracker should die. Maemo Bugzilla shall be the main bugtracking place for all products based on the Maemo stack. I just didn’t like working in Garage Tracker (have to admit that I just took some quick looks to synchronize the status of reports that were duplicated in Maemo Bugzilla). It reminded me a lot of that awful bug tracker that Sourceforge provided when I had a small software project hosted over there, but it may be only my personal opinion that Bugzilla is easier and better to handle than Tracker is.

So I wonder: Are Garage project maintainers happy with Garage tracker?
Would they be interested to track their bugs in Maemo Bugzilla instead? My (not even reasonible or founded) dislike of the Garage Tracker is entirely my personal opinion after working with several bug trackers in the past. I want your opinions – It does not make sense to think about this too much if everybody is fine with Garage Tracker. ;-)

And which projects should be handled in Maemo Bugzilla? Keep it in the current state, as described at the beginning? Open it up for everybody interested in using Maemo Bugzilla to keep track of issues in his/her Maemo based software?

The latter one would bring up the next question that Quim raised in the famous bug 630: Are then the apps preinstalled in a device, »maemo compatible applications«, a different layer sitting on top of the maemo software platform? Stuff to think about…

(Also posted this to Internettablettalk.com and to the Maemo-developers mailing list. Let’s see if I can manage to streamline the feedback. ;-) )

General stuff

Besides reading and triaging the new incoming bug reports, I have spent the last days/weeks cleaning up the bug database. I’m done with bugs with high priority and critical severity set, currently I take a look at any non-enhancement bugs, especially old bugs (this means: trying to reproduce it myself, querying for internal tickets, or asking if this is still an issue).
But now that Diablo is out I expect more incoming bug reports than the approx. 30 reports per week that we had for the last months. Give us your Diablo feedback!

3 Responses to “Defining the Maemo Bugzilla scope”

  1. timsamoff says:

    I much prefer Bugzilla over the Garage Tracker — especially in regards to notification control.

  2. I think that it’s a good idea to unify the garage tracker in the Bugzilla.

    Advantages:

    * Bugzilla is more complete to manage that the garage tracker. As Tim says, notifications, searches, etc.

    * If there is a bugzilla for all the applications, the participation can increase. I mean, power-users can triage bugs (testing, confirming, etc.) and not only to leave this work to the developer. With the garage tracker is very difficult that it happens since it would be necessary to go to every application tracker, to see if there are bugs… and this would take more time that in the unified bugzilla.

    Cons:

    * Users think that these applications are managed by Nokia, and that Nokia has to answer for the bugs in these applications. It needs some way to differ among applications administered by Nokia and 3rd party apps.

    I need listen other opinions about this, but in principle I like it.

    BTW, great work in the Bugzilla.

  3. aklapper says:

    Thanks!

    And for my own list:
    andre: btw, forgot to comment on your blog – I would prefer bugzilla as bugtracker…”