Tracking gadget related bugs in Bugzilla

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
7 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Tracking gadget related bugs in Bugzilla

Erik Moeller-4
In https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/enter_bug.cgi I don't see any
appropriate category for gadgets like Twinkle or Image Annotator. Let
me know if I'm missing something.

Roan, Timo and others have been working towards making gadgets
manageable through a shared repository ( see
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/ResourceLoader/Version_2_Design_Specification
). As part of moving towards better systems for publishing,
internationalizing and sharing gadgets, I suggest we also standardize
how we track gadget bugs.

Analog to the "MediaWiki extensions" product, I suggest that we create
a "MediaWiki gadgets" category, initially with only an "[Other]"
component.

We could make it part of the gadget publication process to a shared
repository on MediaWiki.org that gadgets receive a Bugzilla component,
and that the initial author is added as a default-CC to it.

Thoughts?

Erik


--
Erik Möller
VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation

Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Tracking gadget related bugs in Bugzilla

Roan Kattouw-2
On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 11:33 PM, Erik Moeller <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Analog to the "MediaWiki extensions" product, I suggest that we create
> a "MediaWiki gadgets" category, initially with only an "[Other]"
> component.
>
> We could make it part of the gadget publication process to a shared
> repository on MediaWiki.org that gadgets receive a Bugzilla component,
> and that the initial author is added as a default-CC to it.
>
> Thoughts?
>
I don't believe there is a precedent for tracking bugs to on-wiki
JavaScript on Bugzilla, but I'm open to the idea. The gadget
maintainers would have to agree with you that BZ is preferable over
[[MediaWiki talk:Gadget-foo.js]] though.

Roan

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Tracking gadget related bugs in Bugzilla

Chad
Will they get looked at as often as  "Wictionary Tools?"

-Chad
On Nov 9, 2011 5:50 PM, "Roan Kattouw" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 11:33 PM, Erik Moeller <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > Analog to the "MediaWiki extensions" product, I suggest that we create
> > a "MediaWiki gadgets" category, initially with only an "[Other]"
> > component.
> >
> > We could make it part of the gadget publication process to a shared
> > repository on MediaWiki.org that gadgets receive a Bugzilla component,
> > and that the initial author is added as a default-CC to it.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> I don't believe there is a precedent for tracking bugs to on-wiki
> JavaScript on Bugzilla, but I'm open to the idea. The gadget
> maintainers would have to agree with you that BZ is preferable over
> [[MediaWiki talk:Gadget-foo.js]] though.
>
> Roan
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Tracking gadget related bugs in Bugzilla

Olivier Beaton
In reply to this post by Roan Kattouw-2
How is that different then how extensions have [[Extension talk:name]]
and a BZ entry as well?

On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 5:49 PM, Roan Kattouw <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 11:33 PM, Erik Moeller <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Analog to the "MediaWiki extensions" product, I suggest that we create
>> a "MediaWiki gadgets" category, initially with only an "[Other]"
>> component.
>>
>> We could make it part of the gadget publication process to a shared
>> repository on MediaWiki.org that gadgets receive a Bugzilla component,
>> and that the initial author is added as a default-CC to it.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
> I don't believe there is a precedent for tracking bugs to on-wiki
> JavaScript on Bugzilla, but I'm open to the idea. The gadget
> maintainers would have to agree with you that BZ is preferable over
> [[MediaWiki talk:Gadget-foo.js]] though.
>
> Roan
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Tracking gadget related bugs in Bugzilla

Steven Walling
In reply to this post by Roan Kattouw-2
On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 2:49 PM, Roan Kattouw <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I don't believe there is a precedent for tracking bugs to on-wiki
> JavaScript on Bugzilla, but I'm open to the idea. The gadget
> maintainers would have to agree with you that BZ is preferable over
> [[MediaWiki talk:Gadget-foo.js]] though.
>

Seems relevant: https://github.com/azatoth/twinkle/issues

I bet Twinkle isn't the only gadget (or bot, for that matter) which already
has an issue tracker.
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Tracking gadget related bugs in Bugzilla

Erik Moeller-4
On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 4:20 PM, Steven Walling <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Seems relevant: https://github.com/azatoth/twinkle/issues
>
> I bet Twinkle isn't the only gadget (or bot, for that matter) which already
> has an issue tracker.

For sure. And the fact that this is already happening shows how
complex and important some of these gadgets have become -- much more
so, in fact, than even quite a few MediaWiki extensions and core
features.

Bugzilla has all the obvious benefits a systematic tracker brings over
a talk page, and I agree the two can usefully be complementary. If we
create a product for gadgets, and gently encourage people to use BZ
components for widely used ones, we can get into the habit of using BZ
as appropriate.

--
Erik Möller
VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation

Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Tracking gadget related bugs in Bugzilla

Krinkle
In reply to this post by Erik Moeller-4
On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 11:33 PM, Erik Moeller <[hidden email]> wrote:

> In https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/enter_bug.cgi I don't see any
> appropriate category for gadgets like Twinkle or Image Annotator. Let
> me know if I'm missing something.
>
>
Traditionally on-wiki developments is tracked, on-wiki. So anything related
to templates created by any particular wiki, project workflows, as well as
gadgets all have their own talk page, which is the default place for
discussion and bug reports.

On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 12:08 AM, Olivier Beaton <[hidden email]>
 wrote:

> How is that different then how extensions have [[Extension talk:name]]
> and a BZ entry as well?
>

It's different in that Gadgets and other on-wiki developments are done by
wiki users on wiki pages. Extensions may put their documentation on-wiki
but the extension itself is put in SVN through commit access, whereas
Gadgets are put on actual wiki pages (e.g. [[MediaWiki:Gadget-Foo.js]]).
So what Talk pages are to Wiki pages, BugZilla/CodeReview is to SVN. That's
not to say it should stay that way forever.

Would we only track gadget-issues in BugZilla for gadgets hosted on
MediaWiki.org ?


On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 11:33 PM, Erik Moeller <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Analog to the "MediaWiki extensions" product, I suggest that we create
> a "MediaWiki gadgets" category, initially with only an "[Other]"
> component.
>
> We could make it part of the gadget publication process to a shared
> repository on MediaWiki.org that gadgets receive a BugZilla component,
> and that the initial author is added as a default-CC to it.


Having code review for on-wiki javascript and an issue tracking is an
obvious need, but I don't think it's currently lacking. There is revision
patrol on-wiki and LiquidThreads for talk pages. Neither meant for
reviewing code or tracking issues, but seems to work for now (at least from
my perspective I don't see anyone having problems finding a place to report
bugs or authors having trouble coping with bug management).

Although there is a bit of a problem with de-centralized bug reports for
gadgets, the primary cause for this is because gadgets were copied form
wiki to wiki leading to bug reports bug put on talk pages across wikis,
some on which the original author will never look. By migrating to a gadget
repository there will be only one talk page for a gadget, hence that issue
will pretty much solve itself over time.

Also as a nice bonus, by putting stuff on wiki talk pages it's very easy to
put things on/off watchlists, track on Special:NewMessages, etc. everything
that comes with a MediaWiki (talk) page.

BugZilla as we have it right now imho isn't usable for most wiki users (for
one because they need to create a separate account and expose their e-mail
adress, and BugZilla is (in terms of front-end) somewhat a usability
nightmare for users that aren't programmers or gadget authors, but actual
wiki users reporting problems or requesting features. I think they would
prefer just going to the gadget's talk page and creating a section.


--
Krinkle
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l