Should we set up a issue tracking system?

[OPENSTEP]

In terms of worrying about scalability...

I doubt our efforts in terms of Mac OS X (and even potentially a full GPL fork of OOo) will grow to the size of OOo. The size of OOo in many respects is "artifically inflated" due to their nagging registration panel that shows on startup. I bet a good number of registered users never even bother to go poking around the bug tracking system.

If we even start approaching the same order of magnitude, we'll need to switch systems anyway and, since we're not a corporate front-end, we'll probably need to find some type of P2P solution or migrate data into a preexisting SourceForge style framework (and hope our host doesn't complain about the bandwidth).

ed

[jakeOSX]

Well, personally i'd rather have too much than try to add more later.

so I'd vote for bugzilla.

(oh, Ed, i have tons of bandwidth)

And I like Perl over PHP. (Though they do have pretty much the same syntax)

just my two cents (why isn't there a cent sign on the keyboard??)

-j

[OPENSTEP]

Yeah, I can definitely see that perspective of having too much to start off with. I will say that it was good of me to setup a CVS server even when it was just dan and me playing around back in antiquity hacking away.

Dan's got phpbt up and running right now, so run on over and check it out and provide feedback. It's never too late to switch The only good thing I can think of is that with bug reports it's probably a lot easier to import content into a new DB since it's fairly structured. Things like the forums and portal setup may be a bit more difficult so all I can do is pray Nuke can scale if I throw some serious iron at it

ed

[OPENSTEP]

Isn't the cent symbol Option-4? ¢ (wonder how many browsers wil translate that one properly...)

ed

[jakeOSX]

well, if memory serves (it is early...) the phpnuke-bb algmation uses the phpbb db structure for the forum. this should make it possible to separate the two if needed to allow both to grow independent of each other.

(man, that almost sounded like a psych review)

perhaps it could be as simple as separating the news and support parts of the site?

-j

[schlesi]

Hi,

I've had a look at Neoffice/J's bugzilla, it looks good for me.

May be we should differentiate at the OS selection field between the major versions of OS X(10.1/10.2/10.3)? And may be it would be helpful to differentiate between different Java-versions and implementations (like Sun, Blackdown, IBM)?

Thomas

[fa]

[pluby]

Dan and Thomas,

Add Mac OS 10.1, 10.2, and 10.3 makes sense to me. However, adding different Java implementations seems unnecessary since NeoOffice/J (and OOo) specifically loads only Apple's bundled JVM.

Patrick

[OPENSTEP]

Neo/J IIRC hardcodes which version of the VM it starts in its own code, so in a sense the Neo/J version will imply the java version. I think it functions in the same way for OOo proper as it also uses JNI to instantiate a VM in its process space and never just randomly uses the "java" command and fork/execvs off (which would make it dependent on the installed java version)

ed

[fa]

Mac OS X versions added and moved to the top of the list.

Dan