[maemo-developers] Restructuring HAF product in Maemo bugzilla

From: Jakub.Pavelek at nokia.com Jakub.Pavelek at nokia.com
Date: Thu Mar 29 09:57:01 EEST 2007
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.



>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: 
>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:
>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:
>- 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.
>maemo-developers mailing list
>maemo-developers at maemo.org

More information about the maemo-developers mailing list