GSoC 2014/bug-set-creator: Difference between revisions

Line 80:
 
I want to be able to add bugs from projects OpenHatch doesn't track. For instance, WelcomeBot's issues are not tracked. This could be in the form of freehand entry bugs.
* '''Elana's response(e):''' I'm fine with freehand bug entry so long as they are limited to the bug set creator, and *not* entered into the OpenHatch bug database. If we want the latter, we should be implementing a scrape because that data is not static forever (and the hand-entered bug would be), whereas bug data is going to be basically static for the purposes of a time-limited event.
* '''Elanae:''' IWe wouldwant preferto thatencourage users to add their trackers, particularlyespecially if it's onea type we already support. WelcomeBot was added to our trackers as a result of this conversation, and that's great! However, having your tracker in the OH database will *not* be mandatory for use of this tool.
 
 
I am worried that it is too much effort to get people to add their trackers, and I don't want to add their trackers for them without their permission.
* '''e:''' We will not require use of trackers though, and think about integration with the OH bug database later.
 
 
Line 92 ⟶ 93:
* Skills needed
** '''e:''' is this kind of the same as language?
** '''Shauna:''' No, I'm thinking more like "familiarity with social media", "fluent english", "unit testings", "graphical skills", etc.
* Field of project
** '''e:''' I assume this means [frontend, backend, design, docs, web] etc.
** '''Shauna:''' I meant something like "science" or "humanitarian" or "games" :)
* Estimated time to address bug
 
Line 99 ⟶ 102:
I want it to be easy to sort through the list of bugs. For example, I'd like to be able to use a filter to show only "bugs in Python" AND "bugs tagged Science".
* '''e:''' Something like a user request to sort the table by columns might cover this case. Actual filtering seems like a lot of work, I was thinking these sets wouldn't get over about 30 bugs in size.
* '''e:''' This will be something to consider for a later iteration.
 
 
I want to be able to use a bug on different event lists, and not have to edit it for each list if I want to make changes.
* '''e:''' We will store annotated bugs in their own table, and use a many-to-many relationship between lists and bugs. That way, if bug A is in lists 1, 2, and 3, editing bug A on the list 1 screen will make changes for lists 2 and 3 as well.
 
== Implementation ==
Anonymous user