We've been tracking todo/in progress/completed features here:
https://github.com/matahari/matahari/wiki/Backlog
But as time goes on this list is getting a little unwieldy. Editing the
tables in this wiki format is not easy, and there's no data querying on
a wiki page :)
We had already created a home for Matahari in bugzilla here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?product=Matahari
This is on Red Hat bugzilla, but it's in the "Community" section which
means it is intended to be distro neutral. It's meant for the 'upstream
codebase' not for any particular distro/platform.
Distro specific bugs would go into their respective distros (for example
the Fedora product in Bugzilla)
The thought is that we could use bugzilla for tracking upstream features
in a slightly more coherent and trackable way than a wiki page.
Are there better bug tracking/feature tracking systems out there?
Probably yes. But I'm thinking: low overhead, high return. And
utilizing an existing hosted system seems to be a win here.
So to give folks an idea of how we might translate this wiki page into
bugzillas, here's an example:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=747978
Took 1 minute to file. Basically:
* set $subject (preface with [RFE] perhaps to distinguish from bugs)
* add some detail to Description
We might also want to:
* Set the Target Release (we'll need to populate this with things like
0.5.0, 0.6.0, etc)
* Set the Priority field accordingly (High, Med, Low)
* Assign to relevant person (or leave default)
When someone is working on a feature, they can assign it to themselves
and move to ASSIGNED
The only other state I think we really need to use upstream is CLOSED.
Feature finished, CLOSED->CURRENTRELEASE. Feature nacked,
CLOSED->WONTFIX/CANTFIX, etc, etc
Thoughts? If folks think this is a good idea, I am happy to do the evil
work of translating the wiki into bugs.
Perry