Bugs item #1856583, was opened at 2007-12-22 13:17 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by Item Submitter You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=478070&aid=1856583...
Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: pdpedia Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Thumbnail creation is not working
Initial Comment: ...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=478070&aid=1856583...
Hallo,
SourceForge.net hat gesagt: // SourceForge.net wrote:
Bugs item #1856583, was opened at 2007-12-22 13:17 Category: pdpedia
Should we deal with pdpedia bugs at Sourceforge? Personally I'm against it.
Ciao
On Dec 22, 2007, at 1:33 PM, Frank Barknecht wrote:
Hallo,
SourceForge.net hat gesagt: // SourceForge.net wrote:
Bugs item #1856583, was opened at 2007-12-22 13:17 Category: pdpedia
Should we deal with pdpedia bugs at Sourceforge? Personally I'm against it.
As one of the main users of the bug tracker, I am strongly in favor of it. We have a bug tracker, why use another? And what harm does it do to use that bug tracker for pdpedia bugs?
.hc
------------------------------------------------------------------------ ----
I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. - General Smedley Butler
Hallo, Hans-Christoph Steiner hat gesagt: // Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
On Dec 22, 2007, at 1:33 PM, Frank Barknecht wrote:
SourceForge.net hat gesagt: // SourceForge.net wrote:
Bugs item #1856583, was opened at 2007-12-22 13:17 Category: pdpedia
Should we deal with pdpedia bugs at Sourceforge? Personally I'm against it.
As one of the main users of the bug tracker, I am strongly in favor of it. We have a bug tracker, why use another? And what harm does it do to use that bug tracker for pdpedia bugs?
Before asking for reasons why pdpedia bugs should not be on Sourceforge, I think, giving reasons on why they *should* be there would be appropriate.
So far the SF tracker has been used for bugs in Pd and extensions, i.e. in software, including the software's documentation.
pdpedia is a project separate from the developer's repository. It has it's own website, so bugs could be dealt with using a pdpedia bug wiki page. We also don't track bugs on pd.info with SF, we don't track mailing list issues there etc. I think, mixing developer oriented bugs with bugs in remote websites doesn't help with keeping track and a clear view of software/doc bugs. (No, and I don't think, that the fact, that pdpedia contains texts about Pd automatically qualifies it to use the SF tracker. Wikipedia bugs don't belong to the Linux bug tracker neither.)
Of course that is just my view. I am very able to accept the views of others and I won't veto against pd.info, pdpedia, pd-list etc. bugs, but changes like that *must be discussed* here first, not just decided by one person alone.
Ciao
On Dec 23, 2007, at 2:47 AM, Frank Barknecht wrote:
Hallo, Hans-Christoph Steiner hat gesagt: // Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
On Dec 22, 2007, at 1:33 PM, Frank Barknecht wrote:
SourceForge.net hat gesagt: // SourceForge.net wrote:
Bugs item #1856583, was opened at 2007-12-22 13:17 Category: pdpedia
Should we deal with pdpedia bugs at Sourceforge? Personally I'm against it.
As one of the main users of the bug tracker, I am strongly in favor of it. We have a bug tracker, why use another? And what harm does it do to use that bug tracker for pdpedia bugs?
Before asking for reasons why pdpedia bugs should not be on Sourceforge, I think, giving reasons on why they *should* be there would be appropriate.
So far the SF tracker has been used for bugs in Pd and extensions, i.e. in software, including the software's documentation.
pdpedia is a project separate from the developer's repository. It has it's own website, so bugs could be dealt with using a pdpedia bug wiki page. We also don't track bugs on pd.info with SF, we don't track mailing list issues there etc. I think, mixing developer oriented bugs with bugs in remote websites doesn't help with keeping track and a clear view of software/doc bugs. (No, and I don't think, that the fact, that pdpedia contains texts about Pd automatically qualifies it to use the SF tracker. Wikipedia bugs don't belong to the Linux bug tracker neither.)
Of course that is just my view. I am very able to accept the views of others and I won't veto against pd.info, pdpedia, pd-list etc. bugs, but changes like that *must be discussed* here first, not just decided by one person alone.
Because the pure-data is setup, it works, and people know how to use it. Verbose bug reports are always useful, for pdpedia and anything. If anyone wants to set up another bug tracker for pdpedia, I won't stop them.
.hc
------------------------------------------------------------------------ ----
If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem.
Hallo, Hans-Christoph Steiner hat gesagt: // Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
Of course that is just my view. I am very able to accept the views of others and I won't veto against pd.info, pdpedia, pd-list etc. bugs, but changes like that *must be discussed* here first, not just decided by one person alone.
Because the pure-data is setup, it works, and people know how to use it. Verbose bug reports are always useful, for pdpedia and anything. If anyone wants to set up another bug tracker for pdpedia, I won't stop them.
I don't want to ruin christmas, and as the votes are now 2:1 in favour of pdpedia bugs on SF, it's okay with me as it is now. But I'd like to repeat my main point: Please inform other admins about such changes in the future and don't decide this just on your own. It's a community bug tracker.
Ciao
I have not worked with the bug tracker before, and I think for me it would be easier to use a todo page on the wiki itself, plus the pd-mailing lists. marius.
Frank Barknecht wrote:
Hallo, Hans-Christoph Steiner hat gesagt: // Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
Of course that is just my view. I am very able to accept the views of others and I won't veto against pd.info, pdpedia, pd-list etc. bugs, but changes like that *must be discussed* here first, not just decided by one person alone.
Because the pure-data is setup, it works, and people know how to use it. Verbose bug reports are always useful, for pdpedia and anything. If anyone wants to set up another bug tracker for pdpedia, I won't stop them.
I don't want to ruin christmas, and as the votes are now 2:1 in favour of pdpedia bugs on SF, it's okay with me as it is now. But I'd like to repeat my main point: Please inform other admins about such changes in the future and don't decide this just on your own. It's a community bug tracker.
Ciao
If you want to set that up and manage it, go for it! :D Please take that over, then we can take the bug reports out of the tracker. It would be good to have a little howto on how to submit pdpedia bugs.
.hc
On Dec 24, 2007, at 8:40 AM, marius schebella wrote:
I have not worked with the bug tracker before, and I think for me it would be easier to use a todo page on the wiki itself, plus the pd-mailing lists. marius.
Frank Barknecht wrote:
Hallo, Hans-Christoph Steiner hat gesagt: // Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
Of course that is just my view. I am very able to accept the views of others and I won't veto against pd.info, pdpedia, pd-list etc. bugs, but changes like that *must be discussed* here first, not just decided by one person alone.
Because the pure-data is setup, it works, and people know how to use it. Verbose bug reports are always useful, for pdpedia and anything. If anyone wants to set up another bug tracker for pdpedia, I won't stop them.
I don't want to ruin christmas, and as the votes are now 2:1 in favour of pdpedia bugs on SF, it's okay with me as it is now. But I'd like to repeat my main point: Please inform other admins about such changes in the future and don't decide this just on your own. It's a community bug tracker.
Ciao
PD-dev mailing list PD-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
------------------------------------------------------------------------ ----
As we enjoy great advantages from inventions of others, we should be glad of an opportunity to serve others by any invention of ours; and this we should do freely and generously. - Benjamin Franklin
Hallo, marius schebella hat gesagt: // marius schebella wrote:
I have not worked with the bug tracker before, and I think for me it would be easier to use a todo page on the wiki itself, plus the pd-mailing lists.
Which reminds me of another point: Maybe a separate mailing list for issues regarding pdpedia, that are not directly Pd-related, would be good as well? There already is the pdweb mailing list for puredata.info. I think, this could be extended to cover pdpedia as well. While some issues regarding pdpedia surely should be discussed on pd-list/dev, some others are very boring for people not involved in pdpedia, i.e. the current captcha-discussion or the dozens of translation/template mails IMO are better discussed on a different list.
Ciao
On Dec 26, 2007, at 9:09 AM, Frank Barknecht wrote:
Hallo, marius schebella hat gesagt: // marius schebella wrote:
I have not worked with the bug tracker before, and I think for me it would be easier to use a todo page on the wiki itself, plus the pd-mailing lists.
Which reminds me of another point: Maybe a separate mailing list for issues regarding pdpedia, that are not directly Pd-related, would be good as well? There already is the pdweb mailing list for puredata.info. I think, this could be extended to cover pdpedia as well. While some issues regarding pdpedia surely should be discussed on pd-list/dev, some others are very boring for people not involved in pdpedia, i.e. the current captcha-discussion or the dozens of translation/template mails IMO are better discussed on a different list.
People have already started some pdpedia lists elsewhere. For the template translations, it is good to post them here so that we can get lots of comments from people so the translation is solid. I think the pdpedia list would be something like pd-dev, just for the technical details. But new translations don't happen very often, and will benefit from lots of input, so they'd be best on pd-list.
.hc
------------------------------------------------------------------------ ----
All information should be free. - the hacker ethic
Hallo, Hans-Christoph Steiner hat gesagt: // Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
People have already started some pdpedia lists elsewhere.
Sorry, I didn't know about this list. Where is it? Probably this should be mentioned on pdpedia itself, instead of "For bug reports please write to the pd mailing list" at http://wiki.puredata.info/en/Main_Page#Bugs_and_Todo
Ciao
Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
On Dec 22, 2007, at 1:33 PM, Frank Barknecht wrote:
Hallo,
SourceForge.net hat gesagt: // SourceForge.net wrote:
Bugs item #1856583, was opened at 2007-12-22 13:17 Category: pdpedia
Should we deal with pdpedia bugs at Sourceforge? Personally I'm against it.
As one of the main users of the bug tracker, I am strongly in favor of it. We have a bug tracker, why use another? And what harm does it do to use that bug tracker for pdpedia bugs?
am fine with it, but i would request submitters to be a bit more verbose about there issues. it took me quite a while to figure out what "thumbnail creation is not working" with a body of "..." has to do with pd. only eventually i saw the category "pdpedia", which made it clear.
we could also add a separate tracker (in parallel to "patches", "bugs",...) entirely dedicated to pdpedia. this might keep confusion lower.
mgfa.dr IOhannes
-
Frank Barknecht -
Hans-Christoph Steiner -
IOhannes m zmoelnig -
marius schebella -
SourceForge.net