[maemo-developers] Restructuring HAF product in Maemo bugzilla

[From: Jakub.Pavelek at nokia.com]

Hi all,

I feel that not only developers but general public should be able to use
the bugzilla. Not everyone can map a reproducible bug in File manager to
a specific version of GnomeVFS. I'd still like to have the possiblity to
report a bug for "N800" product and "File Manager" application, which
can then be moved to the proper SW componenet in HAF product. 

And I would rename HAF "SW components" because I could see not only HAF
but also bluetooth or X-server there, we should not make this a HAF
exclusive club.

So, on top level, this would make sense to me:
   * applications
   * software components
   * bugzilla
   * documentation
   * SDK
   * website

Applications would be for normal public, with components like "File
Manager" or "Control Panel".
Software components would be for developers with components like
"libsapwood" or "libgtkhtml" with real version.

Br,

--jakub


>Hi,
>
>Even though overall the Maemo bugzilla is still not as lively 
>as we would wish, the activity level has dramatically 
>increased over the past few months, at least in the HAF 
>product. Nokia's HAF developers are now using it in our daily 
>work, together with the Sardine distro: 
>http://sardine.garage.maemo.org/
>
>For quite a long time, many people have been unhappy with the 
>structure of the Maemo bugzilla, seeing it as awkward and hard 
>to relate to the codebase.
>Some have suggested organizing the bugzilla to closely follow 
>the module structure, and have pointed out to the GNOME 
>bugzilla has an example to follow:
>http://bugzilla.gnome.org/
>That makes a lot of sense to me.
>
>As it happens, I've got administrator rights in bugzilla.
>So I've played a bit with it and added a with a tentative 
>structure for HAF bugs.
>Here's the idea.
>
>- There's a product in bugzilla for each package in the HAF, 
>as listed here:
>https://stage.maemo.org/svn/maemo/projects/haf/trunk/
>- Each product (package) is further decomposed in components 
>according to the maintainer's view of the software structure. 
>For now, there's a 'general' component but more can be added.
>- For each product the valid versions are actually the package 
>versions, not the IT OS release versions.
>
>It's based on the understanding that:
>
>- The Maemo bugzilla is for developers, not end-users. 
>Regardless of whether they are working on the platform or on 
>applications on top of it, developers are interested in and 
>able to understand the platform structure.
>- The Maemo bugzilla needs to support day to day development 
>of the platform, so it needs to accurately describe not only 
>bugs in Maemo releases but also in day to day development
>
>So far I created products for only a few packages: apt, 
>apt-https, atk1.0, dbus, dbus-glib, desktop-file-utils, 
>dosfstools, to get the hang of it. I've listed only the 
>version in Bora plus the current version in Sardine.
>And I have not reclassified any bug.
>
>Another thing to note is that there are components that are 
>not part of the HAF but are nevertheless handled in the Maemo 
>bugzilla. X Window comes to mind. I've noticed some of these 
>bugs are currently in haf/general, possibly for lack of a 
>better place. I think it would make sense to create products 
>in bugzilla for them as well, as for the HAF components.
>
>I'd like to get comments and suggestions before adding the 
>rest of the products and reclassifying the bugs.
>
>Br,
>Carlos
>
>_______________________________________________
>maemo-developers mailing list
>maemo-developers at maemo.org
>https://maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
>