Re: issue tracker?

[Roland Everaert <reveatwork@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2267 bytes --]

I have to admit that I am kind of a state tracking freak, so, your proposal
is welcomed to keep that tendency at bay.

However, I would add a "category" for bugs/issues and feature requests, in
the subject, else, the bot, the readers and the maintainer will have still
to dig deep into threads to know which one was a feature and which one was
actually a bug report.

There must be also some kind of "protocol" to transition between the
various discussions, like
- from bug to a normal question
- normal question to a feature request

We must avoid that to much bugs ends up as simple discussion, without a
proper sanitation of the thread subject. * I am not sure this is clear even
for me :/*


On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 4:54 PM Anthony Carrico <acarrico@memebeam.org>
wrote:

> On 5/22/20 4:17 AM, Roland Everaert wrote:
> > Example of message states:
> > [QUESTION] -> [ANSWER]
> > [BUG] -> ( [CONFIRMED] | [WONTFIX] | [SOLVED] )
> > [CONFIRMED] -> ( [SOLVED] | [PLANNED] )
> > [FEATURE] -> ( [WONTDO] | [PLANNED] | [IMPLEMENTED] )
> > [PLANNED] -> ( [IMPLEMENTED] | [SOLVED] )
>
> I love your enthusiasm. A mailing list has no means to type check
> messages, so I think it does call for a more simplified mechanism,
> especially as a first pass (note that the machine is necessarily
> nondeterministic, since different people can cause it to transition at
> the same time by sending a message).
>
> I'd argue that questions and answers are just normal threads, that don't
> need a state, and issues just need an open state, and a closed state.
> /The details of the of those states are in the threads for anyone who
> cares to look/. So, OPEN/CLOSED and let the threads speak for themselves.
>
> In this way, there are just two kinds of discussions: tracked, and
> untracked. Newbies can quickly pick up the OPEN/CLOSED grammar. People
> can meander threads between the richer states in their discussion,
> hopefully with good subject lines, and 'bots just need to look for one
> pair of keywords, ignoring threads without those keywords. I don't
> actually use emacs for email, but I'm guessing it wouldn't be too hard
> for someone to write an elisp script to scan a mailbox/maildir to gather
> a list of subject lines--is this true?
>
> --
> Anthony Carrico
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2853 bytes --]