OpenCPN Bug Report / Feature Request Tracker

[bdbcat]

Hello...

Thanks to Will (Manimaul) we now have a prototype bug/Feature tracker up and running. We are using Flyspray, a lightweight scripted tracker hosted on the opencpn.org site.

We will soon add a link to opencpn.org intro screen for general use, but for now Forum participants may access the tracker at

Flyspray::OpenCPN: Tasklist

Project name is OpenCPN (duhhh.)

Users may create their own accounts, open Tasks, browse, etc. Tasks may also be opened anonymously.

This tracker will become the primary bug and feature request tracker for opencpn. Sourceforge tracker issues will be moved to Flyspray, and the sourceforge trackers themselves deprecated.

If time and inclination allows, I would like to encourage the owners of existing reported bugs on Version 2.2 Beta to move those issues to the tracker.

Also, if anyone wants to volunteer to become an admin for the tracker to help scrub issues, establish priorities, follow up on postings, etc, they may be added as Flyspray administrators with full Project access. Let me know...

This is a step forward in managing the development process, and I encourage active use of the trackers. It will become the primary "ToDo List" as it gets populated.

Comments welcome
Dave

[Ptizef]

Hi Dave
Sorry but I tried use Flyspray but my account has no authorizations so I can't do anythings except login . I have some small bugs to report
May be I missed something , I have A very limited and temporary connexion at the moment and no time to read all the thread
regards
Jean Pierre

[bdbcat]

Thomas...

Anything special needed to create Flyspray account and post Tasks? I noticed yours, but Ptizef is having trouble...

Flyspray only allows one login account per email address, so I cannot test with a dummy name

Dave

[nohal]

Yes, the default settings look a bit too restrictive... To be honest, I have no idea how Thomas managed to create that task under his own identity. For me the "Open a new task Anonymously" link disappears as soon as I log-in and is not replaced by anything

Pavel

[bdbcat]

OK, I adjusted the permissions for User group Basic, which is the group that all new users get dropped into on joining.

Should be possible to add Tasks now. Should also be possible for all users to view all tasks.

Dave

[cagney]

Originally Posted by bdbcat

Thomas...

Anything special needed to create Flyspray account and post Tasks? I noticed yours, but Ptizef is having trouble...

Flyspray only allows one login account per email address, so I cannot test with a dummy name

Dave

Dave

You have adjusted the permissions, so this should be solved now.
I bypassed the, problem by becoming 'anonymous', and could then get up the form to create a task. Then I logged in and the form was still there, so I just went ahead.

Manimaul/Dave
Still not quite correct with the assigned version. My bug report is now assigned to 2.1.0, but should be 2.2_716, or similar. I have not checked the status for this bug in 2.1.0!

Thomas

Nohal, it's called 64 bit magic

[Netsurfer]

Dave,

Originally Posted by bdbcat

Thanks to Will (Manimaul) we now have a prototype bug/Feature tracker up and running. We are using Flyspray, a lightweight scripted tracker hosted on the opencpn.org site.

We will soon add a link to opencpn.org intro screen for general use, but for now Forum participants may access the tracker at

Flyspray::OpenCPN: Tasklist

Would have been nice if there were a subdomain like http://tracker.opencpn.org/ instead of Flyspray::OpenCPN: Tasklist (because what kind of script is used is not of interest concerning the URI) .

Project name is OpenCPN (duhhh.)

As OpenCPN is the only project (for use with this installation of Flyspray) it should be the only project or at least the Default Project.

This is a step forward in managing the development process, and I encourage active use of the trackers. It will become the primary "ToDo List" as it gets populated.

Maybe some points to mention:
Depending on how detailed you'd like to have users reporting their bugs there should be more options for the OS, e.g. "Win 98, Win 2K, Win XP, Win Vista, Win 7, Windows all". Same for Linux Distros.

Also some more Categories may be helpful, especially in concern of the new modul concept.

Comments welcome

You have asked for ... !

Gunther

[Ptizef]

Thanks a lot
I can now report bugs
regards
Jean Pierre

[cagney]

As the tracker is now it can be quite confusing regarding which version a report applies to. I ought to be mandatory to include build version.

Thomas

[Netsurfer]

Originally Posted by cagney

As the tracker is now it can be quite confusing regarding which version a report applies to. I ought to be mandatory to include build version.

And not to forget about the (upcoming) modules ...

Gunther

[cagney]

Originally Posted by Netsurfer

And not to forget about the (upcoming) modules ...

Gunther

Right. I think that perhaps each module should be a separate project.
Perhaps also each new stable and beta should be a new project, this will help keeping the size of each project within reasonable limits, and help assigning a priority to the report.

Thomas

[Netsurfer]

Thomas,

Originally Posted by cagney

Right. I think that perhaps each module should be a separate project.

I agree. IMHO creating its own project for all kind of stuff that has different versions (as modules are expected to) would be the best way concerning the ease of use/ clarity.

Perhaps also each new stable and beta should be a new project, this will help keeping the size of each project within reasonable limits, and help assigning a priority to the report.

I agree, too!
Creating/ setting up separate projects, at least for each (main) version like 2.1.0 and 2.2.0, offers the possibility to restrain the version just to the build number/ date, which would imho be a great advantage.

Let's see what Dave and the others think about it ...!

Gunther

[Rik-lu]

I uninstalled 2.2 because I had the impression that it was slower than 2.1 (on my pentium 800 thoughbook)

[nohal]

Originally Posted by Netsurfer

Creating/ setting up separate projects, at least for each (main) version like 2.1.0 and 2.2.0, offers the possibility to restrain the version just to the build number/ date, which would imho be a great advantage.

Hi,
I'm afraid it will cause a lot of confusion and problems If there will be a lot of projects, most of the people will not take the time to look at all the task lists and even for developers it doesn't make much sense unless quite a few versions will be supported at the same time and/or the team gets big and divided to parts working on completely different stuff (neither is the case now). As normally there are just two active branches at any time (XXX stable and YYY beta), I think that there is no need for more than two project in flyspray (my personal point of view is that even this would be viable just in case it's reasonably easy to move issues between the projects)
Is there any problem if the versions will be extended with build number and modules added as issue categories? The filtering available would do the work as far as I can tell...

Pavel

[Netsurfer]

Pavel,

Originally Posted by nohal

As normally there are just two active branches at any time (XXX stable and YYY beta), I think that there is no need for more than two project in flyspray

That is exactly what I meant - separate the XXX stable and YYY beta.

Is there any problem if the versions will be extended with build number and modules added as issue categories? The filtering available would do the work as far as I can tell...

I do not know what might be the best way, but ...
It is conceivable that a module has different versions and that there occur bugs only in a certain version of OCPN. So you'll have two different versions - one of the module and one of OCPN. IMHO it would be easier to handle if each module gets its own project. So you can handle the different versions of the module better and you can use e.g. the Category for the OCPN version. I can imagine that this "system" would be easier to maintain (as it is to expect that there are more modules than versions of OCPN).

But as said before, I have no experiences in this field.

Gunther