--- Tony Lambregts tony_lambregts@telusplanet.net wrote:
Andriy Palamarchuk wrote:
[... skipped ...]
Developers, please let me know your areas of expertese. I can overview Wine applications.
Let me see if I have this right you want an inventory of who has what area of experise right. For example if a bug report seems to point to a problem with sockets you could in theory assign it to Martin Wick, or if the problem was with copy protection It could be assigned to Laurent Pinchart. Of course that assumes that both of them are ok with this.
Of course, the responsibility is voluntary (as the whole project BTW :-).
Suggested list (so far): * Guy L. Albertelli - GUI * Alexandre Julliard - wineserver, kernel * Marcus Meissner - printing * Andreas Mohr - documentation * Andriy Palamarchuk - winelib applications under "programs" directory (agreed). * Dimitrie O. Paun - GUI * Laurent Pinchart - copy protection * Eric Pouech - sound * Hidenori TAKESHIMA - quartz, DirectShow (is the scope too narrow?) * Dmitry Timoshkov - internationalization, Unicode, keyboard i/o * Martin Wick - sockets Do we need following directions, who are good owners: * DOS support * common controls * command-line handling * wine tools
This list is *very* subjective. I went through the last month archives of wine-patches. Please, let me know if you agree or not, know other better owner for the subsystem, want to suggest new subsystem, any other comments are welcome.
What exactly do you mean by overview applications? I'm guessing you mean the wine lib applications currently under /programs right?
Correct, see above
- more formally define process of bugs handling
and
use this process.
[... skipped ...]
I see that Tony Lambregts, Michael Cardenas, others
do
a great work with the Bugzilla database. I'm also going to contribute some time for this.
Think if we can get a few more people to to help with this it would be better
Completely agree with you. This is why I invited the companies testers for this work ;-) I'm sure we'll get more volunteers from Wine users as soon as we will be more responsive in Bugzilla. Anyway, the first priority is to start to actually move bugs throgh their lifecycle to the RESOLVED status and now the bottleneck is on status NEW.
- Prioritize bugs. This is, probably, part of (2).
Some bugs, while relatively easy to fix provide
very
big value for the end user. Often developers do not choose such issues to work on, exactly because
these
issues do not present challenge to them. BTW, I do not see a field "Priority" in the bugs entries.
The Severity field is for this and yes we should use it.
Not exactly. "Severity" is an importance for the end user - e.g. crash is the highest level of severity. "Priority" is an importance of the issue for us. E.g. crash of an application due to Wine not supporting vxd is severity "Critical" for the user, but priority is "Minor" for the Wine developers because we are not going to support vxd anyways.
[... skipped ...]
If there are no objections can we change the official documentation to say that bugzilla is the place to report bugs. I noticed that when the wineinstall script had a bug in it that it told the users to report it to wine-devel when it should point them to bugzilla. One other comment about this is that bugzilla's address is http://wine.codeweavers.com/bugs/ and I think it scares people away from using it. I have nothing against CodeWeavers but I think If bugzilla's address was http://www.winehq.com/bugzilla users would be certain it is the place for wine bugs
Agree. Now enter bugs to bugzilla for these changes ;-)
Andriy
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness http://health.yahoo.com