I know this has been mentioned and the conclusion was that it's not needed, but
I think it could be very useful for some types of bugs to have a bugzilla-type
database. I've posted messages about some bugs, especially DMD crashes, that are
very frustrating and block what i'm doing, and don't get a response for a
variety of good reasons. I don't know whether the report was even seen, if there
are plans to fix the bug, whether it's already been reported, if it's already
fixed in the current codebase.
I think a centralised system would decrease walter's workload for these bugs,
but I've been known to be wrong before. What i'm thinking of is a system that
could handle four main types of bugs:
DMD crashes on correct code
DMD crashes on incorrect code
Incorrect behaviour of parts of the language
Phobos bugs (not omissions or design issues, these stay on the newsgroup)
All bugs would have to have a _minimal_ testcase so that the problem could be
easily seen and a fix easily verified.
I'm willing to host a system like this, but I haven't got the bandwidth (128k),
I don't know if it'd be used/useful, and I haven't had experience in it. Still,
I'll set it up if desired.

Thoughts?
Sam

"Sam McCall" <tunah.d@tunah.net> wrote in message
news:c0hdip$307n$1@digitaldaemon.com...
| I know this has been mentioned and the conclusion was that it's not needed,
but
| I think it could be very useful for some types of bugs to have a bugzilla-type
| database. I've posted messages about some bugs, especially DMD crashes, that
are
| very frustrating and block what i'm doing, and don't get a response for a
| variety of good reasons. I don't know whether the report was even seen, if
there
| are plans to fix the bug, whether it's already been reported, if it's already
| fixed in the current codebase.
| I think a centralised system would decrease walter's workload for these bugs,
| but I've been known to be wrong before. What i'm thinking of is a system that
| could handle four main types of bugs:
| DMD crashes on correct code
| DMD crashes on incorrect code
| Incorrect behaviour of parts of the language
| Phobos bugs (not omissions or design issues, these stay on the newsgroup)

This is a good idea. Maybe also having a dmd.bugs newsgroup would help, too.
That way the main newsgroup wouldn't get "cluttered" up with bug reports and the
bug status wouldn't get lost in the main group. Maybe this has been suggested
before, too. I can't remember.
Keeping track of enhancement requests could also go in the database - at least
for small enhancement requests.

| All bugs would have to have a _minimal_ testcase so that the problem could be
| easily seen and a fix easily verified.
| I'm willing to host a system like this, but I haven't got the bandwidth
(128k),
| I don't know if it'd be used/useful, and I haven't had experience in it.
Still,
| I'll set it up if desired.
|
| Thoughts?
| Sam
|
|

How about if Walter sets up a bugzilla or roundup section in the D main website?
-- 
Jan-Eric Duden
"Ben Hinkle" <bhinkle4@juno.com> wrote in message
news:c0ihne$1pm4$1@digitaldaemon.com...
>
> "Sam McCall" <tunah.d@tunah.net> wrote in message
> news:c0hdip$307n$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> | I know this has been mentioned and the conclusion was that it's not
needed,
> but
> | I think it could be very useful for some types of bugs to have a
bugzilla-type
> | database. I've posted messages about some bugs, especially DMD crashes,
that
> are
> | very frustrating and block what i'm doing, and don't get a response for
a
> | variety of good reasons. I don't know whether the report was even seen,
if
> there
> | are plans to fix the bug, whether it's already been reported, if it's
already
> | fixed in the current codebase.
> | I think a centralised system would decrease walter's workload for these
bugs,
> | but I've been known to be wrong before. What i'm thinking of is a system
that
> | could handle four main types of bugs:
> | DMD crashes on correct code
> | DMD crashes on incorrect code
> | Incorrect behaviour of parts of the language
> | Phobos bugs (not omissions or design issues, these stay on the
newsgroup)
>
> This is a good idea. Maybe also having a dmd.bugs newsgroup would help,
too.
> That way the main newsgroup wouldn't get "cluttered" up with bug reports
and the
> bug status wouldn't get lost in the main group. Maybe this has been
suggested
> before, too. I can't remember.
> Keeping track of enhancement requests could also go in the database - at
least
> for small enhancement requests.
>
> | All bugs would have to have a _minimal_ testcase so that the problem
could be
> | easily seen and a fix easily verified.
> | I'm willing to host a system like this, but I haven't got the bandwidth
> (128k),
> | I don't know if it'd be used/useful, and I haven't had experience in it.
> Still,
> | I'll set it up if desired.
> |
> | Thoughts?
> | Sam
> |
> |
>
>

Jan-Eric Duden wrote:
> How about if Walter sets up a bugzilla or roundup section in the D main
> website?
That'd be ideal, if he wants to maintain it, but I'm not sure he's looking for more things to do ;)
Sam

:)
On the other hand you need to maintain such lists anyway if you are doing a
larger project.
I think D is a larger project. :)

I see the point that installing and maintain the issue tracking system
shouldn't take too much effort.
But I guess its easy to find a system that suits Walter's needs and is easy
to install and to maintain.

-- 
Jan-Eric Duden
"Sam McCall" <tunah.d@tunah.net> wrote in message
news:c0q1ia$1e3m$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> Jan-Eric Duden wrote:
> > How about if Walter sets up a bugzilla or roundup section in the D main website?
> That'd be ideal, if he wants to maintain it, but I'm not sure he's
> looking for more things to do ;)
> Sam