LilyPond uses this: http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/list Hans On 23 Dec 2009, at 11:17, Stefan Blixt wrote:

Brilliant! That system with a wiki page is pretty awkward.

/Stefan

2009/12/24 Tomasz Kaye's brain

@Kassen I think you've been maintaining the wiki bug list right?

I seem to remember Ge started the page, at least it was a new initiative in tracking bugs and a attempt at voting on what was urgent. I think this was in the days when Ge was working on his thesis. But yes, I tried to keep it up to date and encouraged it's use.

What do you think about moving it to lighthouse? (or perhaps a different issue tracking system).

I would like to have issue tracking. I'd like to have a clear way of reporting bugs, of getting them confirmed as such (or explained why this would be proper behaviour). I think it's especially important for people to be able to see what are "known issues", considering the insecurities and uncertainties that can come with starting out with text-based code (and ChucK is that for many users). I think it's good for people who report issues to know somebody took them up (see how Dan treats issues in LiSa) and I think it could help lead to a more distributed developer eco-system to know what issues are open, especially when combined with a way of pushing fixes in (see Tom's currently unofficial fix to CNoise). I think scratching off bugs with releases gives a sense of progress. Such a system might also help structure communication amongst the current DEV's. All of these would be great to have, not just in a technological sense or for musical productivity but also socially. I believe we can do better than the WiKi there and that the proposed system is likely better. I don't have a real opinion on what system would be best for this and I don't think anything that the DEV's aren't happy with would make practical sense.

I presumptuously went ahead and copied over all the outstanding bugs from the wiki page at http://wiki.cs.princeton.edu/index.php/ChucK/Bugs/Releaseto the lighthouse system (adding links to archived list threads where appropriate) http://chuckissues.lighthouseapp.com This gives a clearer impression of how the system looks when running.

makes perfect sense to me.

What I dislike about the wiki option is that it currently requires non-members to request a user with an account on the CS wiki to ask a member of CS Staff to create an account.

It does? I can't remember that from creating my own. I do know there is a significant spam problem there.

That's a significant barrier to reporting bugs imo. ( http://wiki.cs.princeton.edu/index.php?title=Special:Userlogin&returnto=Main_Page) At least, It's prevented me from filing them on the wiki so far. By contrast anyone can register with lighthouse and post stuff there. Hopefully a system like lighthouse would be easier to maintain, and to keep manageable, than text on a wiki page too.

Yes, I agree, but (as you noted) the advantage of the wiki is that it attempts (at least) to keep all things ChucKist in a single spot. We already have a site, a list, a wiki, a forum, a irc chatroom (I think?) a online radio show, a FaceBook group, there is likely more. This is bewildering to new users, who are precisely the kind of people who will try unusual things and so in a perfect position to find bugs. Those interests need not necessarily be in conflict but they are there and currently the wiki at least attempts to address those.

More thoughts, lighthouse support/dissent welcome! Merry christmas all!

Merry ChucKmas to all! May you all temporarily turn your ChucK operators sideways to look (vaguely) like a needle tree. I find this time of the year lends itself wonderfully to contemplating the meaning (if any) of symbols which is of course quite useful for programmers. */\ ||* Kas.

Tomasz;

@kassen. I completely agree with your take on both the pros and cons of an extra issue tracker.

...

Great, I really hope the DEV's will chime in on this but so far they have been silent on the issue... there may be good reasons for that, I don't know. When I wrote that last mail, BTW, I wasn't aware of the exact extend of the change to the WiKi that you outline below. This changes matters.

Ah. The change is probably spam related then. Here's a screen grab of the not-so-friendly registration screen at the moment: http://img.skitch.com/20091228-c6rsmfqnnerdhritkjip3u9kh1.jpg

Yeah, I'm sure it's spam. I'd vouch for you, I must count as a member of that WiKi's community by now but clearly I'm not Princeton-CS so that probably doesn't count. Ok, I understand that move but for our purposes that's probably the end of the WiKi as a tool. I'm sure that if you'd ask somebody like Dan or Tom nicely you could get in but I also suspect that neither feels like confirming a few accounts a week through whatever set of red-tape that procedure may have. Another issue is that it's now xmass break so the web department there probably doesn't feel like doing a lot (and rightly so!). Ge will have to make a call here, I feel, but Ge seems offline and might be with his family and hence out of reach. Let's push for a solution here in a week or so after new year (on our calender), because this needs a solution. Submitting bugs should be easy. Good that you brought this up. To me right now this seems like a more urgent issue than any individual bug may be. Yours, Kas.

@Spencer and Hans re. Google Code: If the repository was ported too, a move like that may avoid an increase in the complexity of the ChucKs web presence, while gaining a issue tracker and an open wiki again. That sounds good to me. I guess that the main costs of Google code then are: 1. Dependency on Google (people may be reluctant to trust or support Google) 2. The move to a different SCM system (although my impression is that SVN is very widespread too, and perhaps more likely than CVS to be adopted by new developers). While the option of a move to a different SCM system is being considered, it's worth taking a look at github and launchpad too (which both avoid the scary google issue). Github http:www.github.com Michael's Lick project on github is a relevant example: http://github.com/heuermh/lick Github project hosting is free for open source stuff. It includes a wiki, and issue tracker and a neat facility to view branch hierarchy. The main disadvantage i think is that this would involve transitioning to git, which I'm guessing most ChucK devs are not already using (?). Launchpad https://launchpad.net/ Launchpad is a very similar deal to github, except it uses the Bazaar SCM instead of git. Also free for open source projects. Has an issue tracker, but no wiki as far as I can see. Bazaar seems to be designed with ease of use in mind, less powerful than git--but by no means feature poor, and more friendly. Bazaar is the most obscure of the three SCMs mentioned here I think, which also has a cost. On Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 8:58 AM, Spencer Salazar wrote:

Firstly, I didn't realize the CS wiki had become so closed-up. I think all things considered this has diminished most of the value of that wiki to the ChucK community.

Secondly, I'd like to give a shout out to Google Code. I successfully moved miniAudicle from Princeton CS CVS to Google Code, which has SVN (mountains better than CVS!), a simple wiki, and a simple issue tracker, on a single website. I've been tossing around the idea of moving ChucK to Google Code as well, but haven't quite had the time/willpower to reach agreement with the ChucK team that thats the right move. The main disadvantage of Google Code that I see is that some people don't trust Google.

spencer

On Dec 28, 2009, at 5:12 AM, Kassen wrote:

...

Tomasz; @kassen. I completely agree with your take on both the pros and cons of an extra issue tracker.

Great, I really hope the DEV's will chime in on this but so far they have been silent on the issue... there may be good reasons for that, I don't know. When I wrote that last mail, BTW, I wasn't aware of the exact extend of the change to the WiKi that you outline below. This changes matters.

Ah. The change is probably spam related then. Here's a screen grab of the not-so-friendly registration screen at the moment: http://img.skitch.com/20091228-c6rsmfqnnerdhritkjip3u9kh1.jpg

Yeah, I'm sure it's spam. I'd vouch for you, I must count as a member of that WiKi's community by now but clearly I'm not Princeton-CS so that probably doesn't count. Ok, I understand that move but for our purposes that's probably the end of the WiKi as a tool. I'm sure that if you'd ask somebody like Dan or Tom nicely you could get in but I also suspect that neither feels like confirming a few accounts a week through whatever set of red-tape that procedure may have. Another issue is that it's now xmass break so the web department there probably doesn't feel like doing a lot (and rightly so!).

Ge will have to make a call here, I feel, but Ge seems offline and might be with his family and hence out of reach. Let's push for a solution here in a week or so after new year (on our calender), because this needs a solution. Submitting bugs should be easy.

Good that you brought this up. To me right now this seems like a more urgent issue than any individual bug may be.

Yours, Kas. _______________________________________________ chuck-users mailing list chuck-users@lists.cs.princeton.edu https://lists.cs.princeton.edu/mailman/listinfo/chuck-users

_______________________________________________ chuck-users mailing list chuck-users@lists.cs.princeton.edu https://lists.cs.princeton.edu/mailman/listinfo/chuck-users

The main disadvantage of Google Code that I see is that some people don't

Spencer; trust Google. That would be about privacy though. ChucK's code and issues aren't private, I feel. I'd be perfectly happy to have ChucK code printed on bilboards in TimeSquare. In fact, under certain conditions people are forced to share ChucK's source (like when re-distributing custom binaries). We can distrust Google, but then would we trust GitHub? Princeton? I would trust those in this context. I wouldn't put very private matters on the WiKi either but then again; anything very private would also be grossly off-topic there anyway. I don't think I see this issue in this context. Of course there are personal aspects to our musical expression and there are political implications to Open Source but both benefit from all info being very open; at that point the concern for privacy disappears. Do we practically have any people here who still strongly object to Google despite those factors? Yours, Kas.

To me the main factor seems to be that we need a system that the main DEV's are happy to use. Right now the time that they have to communicate about issues is one of our biggest bottlenecks. I'd be happy to adapt to such a system, then confirm and submit bugs posted to the list or forum. Especially on the forum we see posts that don't look like a real bug report and instead are phrased like a question that in turn indicates we have a bug. Kas.