Cruisers Forum
 


Join CruisersForum Today

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 25-07-2010, 17:53   #31
Registered User

Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 183
Hi,

Sorry, I haven't seen that before, that's quite enough. Thanks both to you.

Jean-Pierre
__________________

__________________
jpiebrig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-07-2010, 01:42   #32
Registered User
 
Netsurfer's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Cologne, Germany
Boat: Beneteau Oceanis 331
Posts: 557
@Dave + all

Since there have been no protest yet , I suppose that you (slightly) agree with the configuration of the tracker so far.

Flyspray also offers the option to set up different categories (for each project separately). At the moment there is only one category (Backend / Core) for each project.

What do you think about using (additional) categories?
Does it make sense in your opinion?
If so, what categories would you propose?

Just as an example: I am personally of the opinion that there is some room left for further improvements of the Windows installer. As it does not belong to the Backend/ Core of OCPN it might have its own category.

Another point to think over or to discuss is the question if it would be better or has any advantages, if we use a separate project just for Feature Requests?

IMHO doing so has some great advantages like
  • version (and build) independent
  • only one task type needed
  • individual fields for the task list
  • easier to maintain
  • more clarity for the user
Please let me know what you think about it.

Thanks,

Gunther
__________________

__________________
Deutschsprachige Community- und Support-Website unter OpenCPN.de
Netsurfer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-07-2010, 02:50   #33
Registered User

Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: On the go. Not in Prague.
Posts: 4,016
Quote:
Originally Posted by Netsurfer View Post
Since there have been no protest yet , I suppose that you (slightly) agree with the configuration of the tracker so far.
Gunther,
thanks a lot for taking care of it
Quote:
Flyspray also offers the option to set up different categories (for each project separately). At the moment there is only one category (Backend / Core) for each project.

What do you think about using (additional) categories?
Does it make sense in your opinion?
If so, what categories would you propose?
Definitely welcome in my eyes - The first two i can imagine is Installer and Rasterization rules
Additionally - Would it be possible to create a separate task type for code patches? I think it would help the people contributing code get some attention...
Quote:
Another point to think over or to discuss is the question if it would be better or has any advantages, if we use a separate project just for Feature Requests?

IMHO doing so has some great advantages like
  • version (and build) independent
  • only one task type needed
  • individual fields for the task list
  • easier to maintain
  • more clarity for the user
Please let me know what you think about it.
You know I'm not a big fan of many different projects (especially if they can't be grouped)

Pavel
__________________
nohal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-07-2010, 00:27   #34
Registered User
 
Netsurfer's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Cologne, Germany
Boat: Beneteau Oceanis 331
Posts: 557
Pavel,

Quote:
Originally Posted by nohal View Post
Additionally - Would it be possible to create a separate task type for code patches? I think it would help the people contributing code get some attention...
Yes, this would be possible. Can you just explain it a little more for my understanding, please?

Quote:
You know I'm not a big fan of many different projects (especially if they can't be grouped)
I know , but moving all Feature Requests to their separate project has IMHO many advantages. Even for contributors it is easier to recognize where to put their request. And no struggle with any version numbers and specific categories.

Gunther
__________________
Deutschsprachige Community- und Support-Website unter OpenCPN.de
Netsurfer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-07-2010, 01:44   #35
Registered User

Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: On the go. Not in Prague.
Posts: 4,016
Quote:
Originally Posted by Netsurfer View Post
Yes, this would be possible. Can you just explain it a little more for my understanding, please?
Gunther,
this task type would be used for code contribution - eg. anchor watch, route manager, celestial navigation patch, etc. would use it when submitted - Most of the "Patches" tracker on sourceforge would fall in this category. Letting people submit contributions as feature requests could not get them the attention they deserve...

Pavel
__________________
nohal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-07-2010, 02:24   #36
Registered User
 
Netsurfer's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Cologne, Germany
Boat: Beneteau Oceanis 331
Posts: 557
Pavel,
Quote:
Originally Posted by nohal View Post
this task type would be used for code contribution - eg. anchor watch, route manager, celestial navigation patch, etc. would use it when submitted ...
I see.
So do you think such a task type would also make sense for each plugin?

And do you agree that it is unnecessary for the 'OpenCPN - stable' project?

Gunther
__________________
Deutschsprachige Community- und Support-Website unter OpenCPN.de
Netsurfer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2011, 12:15   #37
Senior Cruiser
 
sinbad7's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Ubatuba,SP,Brazil (Ex Norway)
Boat: (Ex) Alu. 60' yacht-"Eight Bells"
Posts: 2,717
Images: 57
Send a message via Skype™ to sinbad7
Re: OpenCPN Bug Report / Feature Request Tracker

Quote:
Dave..

Regarding Littlechay's problem initiating an 'extended' .html command with an # anchor: file:///C:/NavWeb/SGNotes.html#CobblersCove

Could there be a possibility that your 'Additional information' feature in OCPN only accepts links ending with htm or html? The above command works perfectly when executed outside OCPN in my Vista Home version.

Tore
It is not a general OpenCPN problem as this feature works OK in Linux/OpenCPN, while in windows (XP) the parser silently drops the html anchor. It could be an wx/win implementation problem. Please enter this as a bug in the tracker.

Thomas
__________________
"And all I ask is a tall ship and a star to steer her by."
sinbad7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2011, 03:15   #38
Registered User

Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: WNA
Boat: Dufour 35
Posts: 3,247
Re: OpenCPN Bug Report / Feature Request Tracker

Quote:
Originally Posted by sinbad7 View Post
It is not a general OpenCPN problem as this feature works OK in Linux/OpenCPN, while in windows (XP) the parser silently drops the html anchor. It could be an wx/win implementation problem. Please enter this as a bug in the tracker.

Thomas
Tore

This thread is not the "tracker". I have entered the issue.
Have a look here FS#646 : Waypoint with "Additional information", html anchor problem.

While you are there have a look around at the different issues!

Thomas
__________________

__________________
cagney is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Norad Santa Tracker Agur's Wish Families, Kids and Pets Afloat 2 24-12-2015 04:16
2.1.n Feature Request Discussion cagney OpenCPN 44 06-09-2010 06:00
Please Help Me with Spot GPS Tracker Jennybug General Sailing Forum 64 11-11-2009 05:12
For Sale: SPOT Satellite Personal Tracker LeftRoamin Classifieds Archive 9 19-07-2009 07:27



Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:06.


Google+
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Social Knowledge Networks
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

ShowCase vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.