From mkanat at bugzilla.org  Tue Feb  1 22:32:56 2011
From: mkanat at bugzilla.org (Max Kanat-Alexander)
Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2011 14:32:56 -0800
Subject: Community Research, Blogified
Message-ID: <4D488A18.8090204@bugzilla.org>

	Hey folks. I don't know if you remember the community research that I
did a while ago, or all the work that I did on removing barriers to
entry even longer ago, but I've finally written it all up as a blog post:

http://www.codesimplicity.com/post/open-source-community-simplified/

	It's probably good reading for anybody who wants to help improve
Bugzilla's community (or who wants to start/improve an open-source
community of their own).

	-Max
-- 
http://www.bugzillasource.com/
Competent, Friendly Bugzilla, Perl, and IT Services


From szabgab at gmail.com  Wed Feb  2 08:15:42 2011
From: szabgab at gmail.com (Gabor Szabo)
Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2011 10:15:42 +0200
Subject: Community Research, Blogified
In-Reply-To: <4D488A18.8090204@bugzilla.org>
References: <4D488A18.8090204@bugzilla.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTin9JY54mGUfcfdjzO6eFPCekaVYU-fzF6XKnsui@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Max,

On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 12:32 AM, Max Kanat-Alexander
<mkanat at bugzilla.org> wrote:
> ? ? ? ?Hey folks. I don't know if you remember the community research that I
> did a while ago, or all the work that I did on removing barriers to
> entry even longer ago, but I've finally written it all up as a blog post:
>
> http://www.codesimplicity.com/post/open-source-community-simplified/
>
> ? ? ? ?It's probably good reading for anybody who wants to help improve
> Bugzilla's community (or who wants to start/improve an open-source
> community of their own).
>
> ? ? ? ?-Max
> --
> http://www.bugzillasource.com/
> Competent, Friendly Bugzilla, Perl, and IT Services

Thanks for sharing this. I tweeted it and forwarded to
two mailing lists. While these might not be your primary source of
contributors I think distributing this article widely will itself help
addressing the "Getting people interested in contributing" issue.

BTW Do you have a "Report a BUG in Bugzilla" or a
"Contribute to Bugzila" button on the bugzilla installations?

regards
   Gabor

-- 
Gabor Szabo? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?? http://szabgab.com/
Perl Ecosystem Group ? ? ? http://perl-ecosystem.org/


From mkanat at bugzilla.org  Wed Feb  2 08:41:07 2011
From: mkanat at bugzilla.org (Max Kanat-Alexander)
Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2011 00:41:07 -0800
Subject: Community Research, Blogified
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTin9JY54mGUfcfdjzO6eFPCekaVYU-fzF6XKnsui@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4D488A18.8090204@bugzilla.org> <AANLkTin9JY54mGUfcfdjzO6eFPCekaVYU-fzF6XKnsui@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4D4918A3.9010004@bugzilla.org>

On 02/02/2011 12:15 AM, Gabor Szabo wrote:
> Thanks for sharing this. I tweeted it and forwarded to
> two mailing lists. While these might not be your primary source of
> contributors I think distributing this article widely will itself help
> addressing the "Getting people interested in contributing" issue.

	Thanks Gabor!

> BTW Do you have a "Report a BUG in Bugzilla" or a
> "Contribute to Bugzila" button on the bugzilla installations?

	We have a link about contributing in the Parameters section, but not
much more than that, right now.

	-Max
-- 
http://www.bugzillasource.com/
Competent, Friendly Bugzilla, Perl, and IT Services


From szabgab at gmail.com  Wed Feb  2 09:11:29 2011
From: szabgab at gmail.com (Gabor Szabo)
Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2011 11:11:29 +0200
Subject: Community Research, Blogified
In-Reply-To: <4D4918A3.9010004@bugzilla.org>
References: <4D488A18.8090204@bugzilla.org>
	<AANLkTin9JY54mGUfcfdjzO6eFPCekaVYU-fzF6XKnsui@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D4918A3.9010004@bugzilla.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikqQ-7b8E-rEPsHvPD=gqeWcuh2uxNXp_HS2iQD@mail.gmail.com>

BTW how did you conduct your research?
Have you looked up the e-mails of past contributors and sent them an e-mail
asking for a free text response or did you have something more formal?
A survey with specific questions and list of available answers?

regards
Gabor


From mkanat at bugzilla.org  Wed Feb  2 11:25:05 2011
From: mkanat at bugzilla.org (Max Kanat-Alexander)
Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2011 03:25:05 -0800
Subject: Community Research, Blogified
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikqQ-7b8E-rEPsHvPD=gqeWcuh2uxNXp_HS2iQD@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4D488A18.8090204@bugzilla.org>	<AANLkTin9JY54mGUfcfdjzO6eFPCekaVYU-fzF6XKnsui@mail.gmail.com>	<4D4918A3.9010004@bugzilla.org> <AANLkTikqQ-7b8E-rEPsHvPD=gqeWcuh2uxNXp_HS2iQD@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4D493F11.1060804@bugzilla.org>

On 02/02/2011 01:11 AM, Gabor Szabo wrote:
> BTW how did you conduct your research?
> Have you looked up the e-mails of past contributors and sent them an e-mail
> asking for a free text response or did you have something more formal?
> A survey with specific questions and list of available answers?

	I looked up the emails of past contributors and had a pretty detailed
email discussion with them, back and forth. Their answers aren't public,
though, unfortunately, as I wanted to give each person the freedom to
say whatever they wanted without the fear of public retaliation.

	-Max
-- 
http://www.bugzillasource.com/
Competent, Friendly Bugzilla, Perl, and IT Services


From mkanat at bugzilla.org  Wed Feb  2 23:06:46 2011
From: mkanat at bugzilla.org (Max Kanat-Alexander)
Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2011 15:06:46 -0800
Subject: WebService Documentation
Message-ID: <4D49E386.7020609@bugzilla.org>

	Hey hey. People have had trouble finding the correct WebService
documentation, so I centralized the links to it in a wiki page:

	https://wiki.mozilla.org/Bugzilla:WebService

	-Max
-- 
http://www.bugzillasource.com/
Competent, Friendly Bugzilla, Perl, and IT Services


From mkanat at bugzilla.org  Fri Feb 11 20:06:28 2011
From: mkanat at bugzilla.org (Max Kanat-Alexander)
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2011 12:06:28 -0800
Subject: Should Quicksearch Search Comments By Default?
Message-ID: <4D5596C4.6010502@bugzilla.org>

	Hey folks! For some background on this, see:

	https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=580490#c19

	The question is this--should we be searching comments in quicksearch
*at all*? Is it actually valuable to you or your users that when you
type a bare word into quicksearch, it searches the comments in addition
to searching everything else?

	There have been a few complaints about result quality with the
system--that searching comments results in a lot of extra results that
people don't need, and that it's easy enough to just type "comm:" or
"desc:" and also search comments that way if you really want to.

	-Max
-- 
http://www.bugzillasource.com/
Competent, Friendly Bugzilla, Perl, and IT Services


From nikolov.javor at gmail.com  Fri Feb 11 20:20:15 2011
From: nikolov.javor at gmail.com (Yavor Nikolov)
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2011 22:20:15 +0200
Subject: Should Quicksearch Search Comments By Default?
In-Reply-To: <4D5596C4.6010502@bugzilla.org>
References: <4D5596C4.6010502@bugzilla.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinERtVRrurHNic6Hg4AbEERBzo0VD1Pzi56zpNX@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Max,

What's best seems to depend on the particular context (total number of bugs,
etc.). What about introducing some configurable flag on global/per
project/per user level which to control the default behavior (ability to see
and override these settings on each search is still nice to have)?

- Yavor

On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 22:06, Max Kanat-Alexander <mkanat at bugzilla.org>wrote:

>        Hey folks! For some background on this, see:
>
>        https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=580490#c19
>
>        The question is this--should we be searching comments in quicksearch
> *at all*? Is it actually valuable to you or your users that when you
> type a bare word into quicksearch, it searches the comments in addition
> to searching everything else?
>
>        There have been a few complaints about result quality with the
> system--that searching comments results in a lot of extra results that
> people don't need, and that it's easy enough to just type "comm:" or
> "desc:" and also search comments that way if you really want to.
>
>        -Max
> --
> http://www.bugzillasource.com/
> Competent, Friendly Bugzilla, Perl, and IT Services
> -
> To view or change your list settings, click here:
> <http://bugzilla.org/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr?user=nikolov.javor at gmail.com>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bugzilla.org/pipermail/developers/attachments/20110211/df117349/attachment.html>

From mkanat at bugzilla.org  Fri Feb 11 20:27:39 2011
From: mkanat at bugzilla.org (Max Kanat-Alexander)
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2011 12:27:39 -0800
Subject: Should Quicksearch Search Comments By Default?
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinERtVRrurHNic6Hg4AbEERBzo0VD1Pzi56zpNX@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4D5596C4.6010502@bugzilla.org> <AANLkTinERtVRrurHNic6Hg4AbEERBzo0VD1Pzi56zpNX@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4D559BBB.4010506@bugzilla.org>

On 02/11/2011 12:20 PM, Yavor Nikolov wrote:
> What's best seems to depend on the particular context (total number of
> bugs, etc.). What about introducing some configurable flag on global/per
> project/per user level which to control the default behavior (ability to
> see and override these settings on each search is still nice to have)?

	That's another option we're considering, yeah. I wanted to see if
searching comments by default was valuable at all to people, though. If
there aren't enough people who think it's valuable, then we could just
remove it entirely and not have to add a preference.

	-Max
-- 
http://www.bugzillasource.com/
Competent, Friendly Bugzilla, Perl, and IT Services


From dwierenga at gmail.com  Fri Feb 11 20:46:02 2011
From: dwierenga at gmail.com (Dan Wierenga)
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2011 12:46:02 -0800
Subject: Should Quicksearch Search Comments By Default?
In-Reply-To: <4D559BBB.4010506@bugzilla.org>
References: <4D5596C4.6010502@bugzilla.org>
	<AANLkTinERtVRrurHNic6Hg4AbEERBzo0VD1Pzi56zpNX@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D559BBB.4010506@bugzilla.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTine-gSq6id-VvH+q0uKXk5QW1LMC+Vxje-PZt0Q@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 12:27 PM, Max Kanat-Alexander
<mkanat at bugzilla.org>wrote:

> I wanted to see if searching comments by default was valuable at all to
> people, though.
>

Most of my users would think Quicksearch was flat-out broken if it didn't
search comments.

I'd go so far as to say that more user preferences are needed for
Quicksearch, like a preference to search closed bugs as well. I field
questions all the time on "why my search didn't find a bug", and it's
because they used Quicksearch and were looking for closed bugs.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bugzilla.org/pipermail/developers/attachments/20110211/28e68c47/attachment.html>

From lpsolit at gmail.com  Sat Feb 12 00:13:41 2011
From: lpsolit at gmail.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Fr=E9d=E9ric_Buclin?=)
Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2011 01:13:41 +0100
Subject: Should Quicksearch Search Comments By Default?
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTine-gSq6id-VvH+q0uKXk5QW1LMC+Vxje-PZt0Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4D5596C4.6010502@bugzilla.org>	<AANLkTinERtVRrurHNic6Hg4AbEERBzo0VD1Pzi56zpNX@mail.gmail.com>	<4D559BBB.4010506@bugzilla.org> <AANLkTine-gSq6id-VvH+q0uKXk5QW1LMC+Vxje-PZt0Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4D55D0B5.9050503@gmail.com>

>> I wanted to see if searching comments by default was valuable at all to
>> people, though.

I use QS a lot, and I am never interested in comments. So I explicitly
list fields to look into.


> I'd go so far as to say that more user preferences are needed for
> Quicksearch, like a preference to search closed bugs as well.

People who complain about QS not looking into closed bugs by default
should learn the logic behind it. QS is for advanced users, not for
newbies. So it should be built with advanced users in mind, who can
easily prepend ALL to take all bugs into account. Newbies can and should
use the search form.

LpSolit


From mkanat at bugzilla.org  Sat Feb 12 00:18:13 2011
From: mkanat at bugzilla.org (Max Kanat-Alexander)
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2011 16:18:13 -0800
Subject: Should Quicksearch Search Comments By Default?
In-Reply-To: <4D55D0B5.9050503@gmail.com>
References: <4D5596C4.6010502@bugzilla.org>	<AANLkTinERtVRrurHNic6Hg4AbEERBzo0VD1Pzi56zpNX@mail.gmail.com>	<4D559BBB.4010506@bugzilla.org> <AANLkTine-gSq6id-VvH+q0uKXk5QW1LMC+Vxje-PZt0Q@mail.gmail.com> <4D55D0B5.9050503@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4D55D1C5.4090406@bugzilla.org>

On 02/11/2011 04:13 PM, Fr?d?ric Buclin wrote:
> QS is for advanced users, not for
> newbies. So it should be built with advanced users in mind, who can
> easily prepend ALL to take all bugs into account. Newbies can and should
> use the search form.

	Quicksearch is the very first search box users see, on the front page.
So it should do something sensible for novice users. But that would be a
separate discussion from this one.

	-Max
-- 
http://www.bugzillasource.com/
Competent, Friendly Bugzilla, Perl, and IT Services


From dwierenga at gmail.com  Sat Feb 12 00:27:17 2011
From: dwierenga at gmail.com (Dan Wierenga)
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2011 16:27:17 -0800
Subject: Should Quicksearch Search Comments By Default?
In-Reply-To: <4D55D0B5.9050503@gmail.com>
References: <4D5596C4.6010502@bugzilla.org>
	<AANLkTinERtVRrurHNic6Hg4AbEERBzo0VD1Pzi56zpNX@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D559BBB.4010506@bugzilla.org>
	<AANLkTine-gSq6id-VvH+q0uKXk5QW1LMC+Vxje-PZt0Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D55D0B5.9050503@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTik96YYUxL_OCBTL_h5cJU83iZyTbYO=oD=cC+Rz@mail.gmail.com>

2011/2/11 Fr?d?ric Buclin <lpsolit at gmail.com>

>  QS is for advanced users, not for
> newbies. So it should be built with advanced users in mind, who can
> easily prepend ALL to take all bugs into account. Newbies can and should
> use the search form.
>

Well, the QuickSearch is by far the most newbie-friendly feature in all of
Bugzilla, and the Search page is by far the most intimidating.  If the
Quicksearch doesn't work for newbies, they're just going to think Bugzilla
sucks.  If I'm lucky they'll fill out a bug telling me how my Bugzilla
search sucks.  If I'm unlucky they'll send an email to my boss, telling HIM
how my Bugzilla search sucks....
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bugzilla.org/pipermail/developers/attachments/20110211/178d0982/attachment.html>

From lpsolit at gmail.com  Sat Feb 12 00:39:38 2011
From: lpsolit at gmail.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Fr=E9d=E9ric_Buclin?=)
Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2011 01:39:38 +0100
Subject: Should Quicksearch Search Comments By Default?
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTik96YYUxL_OCBTL_h5cJU83iZyTbYO=oD=cC+Rz@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4D5596C4.6010502@bugzilla.org>	<AANLkTinERtVRrurHNic6Hg4AbEERBzo0VD1Pzi56zpNX@mail.gmail.com>	<4D559BBB.4010506@bugzilla.org>	<AANLkTine-gSq6id-VvH+q0uKXk5QW1LMC+Vxje-PZt0Q@mail.gmail.com>	<4D55D0B5.9050503@gmail.com> <AANLkTik96YYUxL_OCBTL_h5cJU83iZyTbYO=oD=cC+Rz@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4D55D6CA.4080305@gmail.com>

> Well, the QuickSearch is by far the most newbie-friendly feature in all of
> Bugzilla, and the Search page is by far the most intimidating.

I so much don't care about newbies here. The first thing they see is
index.cgi, and maybe it would make a better sense for them to see the
simple search form instead of a QS box, and let us, advanced users, use
the QS form in the header/footer.

LpSolit


From mkanat at bugzilla.org  Sat Feb 12 00:49:07 2011
From: mkanat at bugzilla.org (Max Kanat-Alexander)
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2011 16:49:07 -0800
Subject: Should Quicksearch Search Comments By Default?
In-Reply-To: <4D55D6CA.4080305@gmail.com>
References: <4D5596C4.6010502@bugzilla.org>	<AANLkTinERtVRrurHNic6Hg4AbEERBzo0VD1Pzi56zpNX@mail.gmail.com>	<4D559BBB.4010506@bugzilla.org>	<AANLkTine-gSq6id-VvH+q0uKXk5QW1LMC+Vxje-PZt0Q@mail.gmail.com>	<4D55D0B5.9050503@gmail.com> <AANLkTik96YYUxL_OCBTL_h5cJU83iZyTbYO=oD=cC+Rz@mail.gmail.com> <4D55D6CA.4080305@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4D55D903.8080707@bugzilla.org>

	Can we keep this discussion focused on whether or not we want to search
comments, please?

	-Max
-- 
http://www.bugzillasource.com/
Competent, Friendly Bugzilla, Perl, and IT Services


From user at mozilla-xp.com/  Mon Feb 14 06:55:02 2011
From: user at mozilla-xp.com/ (ShailajaJ)
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2011 00:55:02 -0600
Subject: How to integrate Bugzilla with QC
Message-ID: <_OSdnXgK7MpbTMXQnZ2dnUVZ_tCdnZ2d@mozilla.org>

I need to integrate Bugzilla with QC. When ever a bug is posted in Bugzilla it has to show up in QC along with its attachment and comments. Is there any way to do this?


_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla


From ahdevans at gmail.com  Mon Feb 14 17:55:00 2011
From: ahdevans at gmail.com (Aaron Evans)
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2011 09:55:00 -0800
Subject: How to integrate Bugzilla with QC
In-Reply-To: <_OSdnXgK7MpbTMXQnZ2dnUVZ_tCdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
References: <_OSdnXgK7MpbTMXQnZ2dnUVZ_tCdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
Message-ID: <4D596C74.2050605@gmail.com>

There are two ways you could go about it. 

1) Use the  OTA API (from HP) to write a script that syncs with Bugzilla
(it could be called via a hook on bug change in Bugzilla)

2) Use the QC Synchronization server to accomplish this. 

#2 is a better technical option, but because of license restrictions, it
couldn't be released as open source (you need to have a QC license for
the Sync server SDK.)
 
That said, I'd like to tackle this problem. I've recently done some
integration work with Quality Center and JUnit tests, and I'd like to do
something similar for Bugzilla.  Let me know off list and we can discuss
it.  From another similar post, I suspect it would be considered off topic.

It's not really a Bugzilla development issue since it concerns an
external feature.  It might be nice to have a plugin architecture for
Bugzilla for things like this though.

-Aaron
425-242-4304
one-shore.com




On 2/13/2011 10:55 PM, ShailajaJ wrote:
> I need to integrate Bugzilla with QC. When ever a bug is posted in Bugzilla it has to show up in QC along with its attachment and comments. Is there any way to do this?
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
> dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla
> -
> To view or change your list settings, click here:
> <http://bugzilla.org/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr?user=ahdevans at gmail.com>



From user at mozilla-xp.com/  Tue Feb 15 04:34:12 2011
From: user at mozilla-xp.com/ (ShailajaJ)
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2011 22:34:12 -0600
Subject: How to integrate Bugzilla with QC
References: <_OSdnXgK7MpbTMXQnZ2dnUVZ_tCdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
Message-ID: <2NOdnb3SJKnZn8fQnZ2dnUVZ_u-dnZ2d@mozilla.org>

Thanks Aaron,

Yes I prefer option #2. I have licensed version of QC. I installed QC Sync server and QC sync client. Now I need Bugzilla adapter to place in adapter folder. 

AFAIK, I think we have to develop our own adapter on top of QC SDK. But I heard there is one already developed adapter for Bugzilla from one of the partners of HP. I got stuck here, building our own adapter is fine or not. If so, how to do this?



_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla


From ahdevans at gmail.com  Tue Feb 15 18:49:27 2011
From: ahdevans at gmail.com (Aaron Evans)
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2011 10:49:27 -0800
Subject: How to integrate Bugzilla with QC
In-Reply-To: <2NOdnb3SJKnZn8fQnZ2dnUVZ_u-dnZ2d@mozilla.org>
References: <_OSdnXgK7MpbTMXQnZ2dnUVZ_tCdnZ2d@mozilla.org> <2NOdnb3SJKnZn8fQnZ2dnUVZ_u-dnZ2d@mozilla.org>
Message-ID: <4D5ACAB7.4050300@gmail.com>

If you have your own adapter, that's good.  I've heard of one company, 
proficom.de who claims to have developed one.  I'm looking for a company 
that would be interested in sponsoring my development of a free Bugzilla 
adapter.

On 02/14/2011 08:34 PM, ShailajaJ wrote:
> Thanks Aaron,
>
> Yes I prefer option #2. I have licensed version of QC. I installed QC Sync server and QC sync client. Now I need Bugzilla adapter to place in adapter folder.
>
> AFAIK, I think we have to develop our own adapter on top of QC SDK. But I heard there is one already developed adapter for Bugzilla from one of the partners of HP. I got stuck here, building our own adapter is fine or not. If so, how to do this?
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
> dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla
> -
> To view or change your list settings, click here:
> <http://bugzilla.org/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr?user=ahdevans at gmail.com>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bugzilla.org/pipermail/developers/attachments/20110215/731d6cd1/attachment.html>

From gerv at mozilla.org  Wed Feb 16 15:45:35 2011
From: gerv at mozilla.org (Gervase Markham)
Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 21:45:35 +0600
Subject: Bugzilla 4 Shipping
Message-ID: <HbSdnZlDqvm9bMbQnZ2dnUVZ_tudnZ2d@mozilla.org>

Awesome :-) It's been a long road, with a few unexpected twists and 
turns near the end, but I am so pleased we shipped. Well done, everyone 
- particularly Max and Frederic, who have put in some very long hours 
recently. Bugzilla 4 rocks. :-)

Gerv

_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla


From lpsolit at gmail.com  Thu Feb 17 23:15:52 2011
From: lpsolit at gmail.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Fr=E9d=E9ric_Buclin?=)
Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2011 00:15:52 +0100
Subject: Bugzilla meeting on Tuesday, March 1st at 11:00 PST (19:00 GMT, 20:00
 CET)
Message-ID: <4D5DAC28.1030705@gmail.com>

Hi all,

It has been a long time since our last Bugzilla meeting (October 5,
2010), and it's high time to meet again to decide what to do for
Bugzilla 4.2. So our next meeting will take place on

  Tuesday, March 1st at 11:00 PST (19:00 GMT, 20:00 CET)

on IRC in the irc.mozilla.org/#bugzilla-meeting channel.

As usual, everyone is welcome!


See you in two weeks,

LpSolit


From guy.pyrzak at gmail.com  Fri Feb 18 01:58:11 2011
From: guy.pyrzak at gmail.com (Guy Pyrzak)
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2011 17:58:11 -0800
Subject: How to integrate Bugzilla with QC
In-Reply-To: <4D596C74.2050605@gmail.com>
References: <_OSdnXgK7MpbTMXQnZ2dnUVZ_tCdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
	<4D596C74.2050605@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikbVqY3EAMuLzoxVAXEn2AADTGzTYz1q6xU9HJV@mail.gmail.com>

I am not familiar with QC but bugzilla does have a plug in architecture that
you can use. We call them extensions.they are fairly straight forward to
write and there are a few examples out there. Just google bugzilla and
extensions.
On Feb 14, 2011 9:55 AM, "Aaron Evans" <ahdevans at gmail.com> wrote:
> There are two ways you could go about it.
>
> 1) Use the OTA API (from HP) to write a script that syncs with Bugzilla
> (it could be called via a hook on bug change in Bugzilla)
>
> 2) Use the QC Synchronization server to accomplish this.
>
> #2 is a better technical option, but because of license restrictions, it
> couldn't be released as open source (you need to have a QC license for
> the Sync server SDK.)
>
> That said, I'd like to tackle this problem. I've recently done some
> integration work with Quality Center and JUnit tests, and I'd like to do
> something similar for Bugzilla. Let me know off list and we can discuss
> it. From another similar post, I suspect it would be considered off topic.
>
> It's not really a Bugzilla development issue since it concerns an
> external feature. It might be nice to have a plugin architecture for
> Bugzilla for things like this though.
>
> -Aaron
> 425-242-4304
> one-shore.com
>
>
>
>
> On 2/13/2011 10:55 PM, ShailajaJ wrote:
>> I need to integrate Bugzilla with QC. When ever a bug is posted in
Bugzilla it has to show up in QC along with its attachment and comments. Is
there any way to do this?
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
>> dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
>> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla
>> -
>> To view or change your list settings, click here:
>> <http://bugzilla.org/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr?user=ahdevans at gmail.com>
>
> -
> To view or change your list settings, click here:
> <http://bugzilla.org/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr?user=guy.pyrzak at gmail.com>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bugzilla.org/pipermail/developers/attachments/20110217/33669c32/attachment.html>

From guy.pyrzak at gmail.com  Fri Feb 18 02:07:46 2011
From: guy.pyrzak at gmail.com (Guy Pyrzak)
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2011 18:07:46 -0800
Subject: Should Quicksearch Search Comments By Default?
In-Reply-To: <4D55D903.8080707@bugzilla.org>
References: <4D5596C4.6010502@bugzilla.org>
	<AANLkTinERtVRrurHNic6Hg4AbEERBzo0VD1Pzi56zpNX@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D559BBB.4010506@bugzilla.org>
	<AANLkTine-gSq6id-VvH+q0uKXk5QW1LMC+Vxje-PZt0Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D55D0B5.9050503@gmail.com>
	<AANLkTik96YYUxL_OCBTL_h5cJU83iZyTbYO=oD=cC+Rz@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D55D6CA.4080305@gmail.com>
	<4D55D903.8080707@bugzilla.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=2Lrc9bajX68KLGpSja38o5NZgcmy-H+j=6kmk@mail.gmail.com>

Since often the comments contain the description of the bug and not the
summary I think we should keep it. Infact I think bare text should only
search summary and comments but thats just me.

Do we have a bug number for the other minithread?

-Guy
On Feb 11, 2011 4:50 PM, "Max Kanat-Alexander" <mkanat at bugzilla.org> wrote:
> Can we keep this discussion focused on whether or not we want to search
> comments, please?
>
> -Max
> --
> http://www.bugzillasource.com/
> Competent, Friendly Bugzilla, Perl, and IT Services
> -
> To view or change your list settings, click here:
> <http://bugzilla.org/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr?user=guy.pyrzak at gmail.com>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bugzilla.org/pipermail/developers/attachments/20110217/8826fcc3/attachment.html>

From gerv at mozilla.org  Sun Feb 20 05:48:38 2011
From: gerv at mozilla.org (Gervase Markham)
Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2011 11:48:38 +0600
Subject: How to integrate Bugzilla with QC
In-Reply-To: <mailman.621.1297994326.9778.dev-apps-bugzilla@lists.mozilla.org>
References: <_OSdnXgK7MpbTMXQnZ2dnUVZ_tCdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<4D596C74.2050605@gmail.com>
	<mailman.621.1297994326.9778.dev-apps-bugzilla@lists.mozilla.org>
Message-ID: <BJqdncAKRs-lNv3QnZ2dnUVZ_sqdnZ2d@mozilla.org>

On 18/02/11 07:58, Guy Pyrzak wrote:
> I am not familiar with QC but bugzilla does have a plug in architecture that
> you can use. We call them extensions.they are fairly straight forward to
> write and there are a few examples out there. Just google bugzilla and
> extensions.

I think Aaron might mean an plug-in system specifically for syncing 
(just as we now have one for migrations). I also think this would be a 
good thing for Bugzilla to have.

Gerv
_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla


From gerv at mozilla.org  Sun Feb 20 05:49:57 2011
From: gerv at mozilla.org (Gervase Markham)
Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2011 11:49:57 +0600
Subject: How to integrate Bugzilla with QC
In-Reply-To: <_OSdnXgK7MpbTMXQnZ2dnUVZ_tCdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
References: <_OSdnXgK7MpbTMXQnZ2dnUVZ_tCdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
Message-ID: <BJqdncMKRs8aNv3QnZ2dnUVZ_soAAAAA@mozilla.org>

On 14/02/11 12:55, ShailajaJ wrote:
> I need to integrate Bugzilla with QC. When ever a bug is posted in
> Bugzilla it has to show up in QC along with its attachment and
> comments. Is there any way to do this?

I have done this in the past for another company, although sadly the 
code is not open source (although it may be in the future). Email me for 
more information.

Gerv
_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla


From user at mozilla-xp.com/  Tue Feb 22 12:45:44 2011
From: user at mozilla-xp.com/ (thechennaidude)
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2011 06:45:44 -0600
Subject: Bugzilla 3.6.3 - graphical reports not working even after installing
	all the dependant perl modules
Message-ID: <GKGdndSTBLxlMv7QnZ2dnUVZ_gGdnZ2d@mozilla.org>

Hello,

I have installed Bugzilla 3.6.3 on Win XP. I am trying to generate graphical reports but I get exceptions related to the unavailability of the Graphical Reports feature. I confirmed that all the Perl modules are installed by executing checksetup.pl.

Can you someone help me?

Thanks...
---



_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla


From guy.pyrzak at gmail.com  Tue Feb 22 18:07:39 2011
From: guy.pyrzak at gmail.com (Guy Pyrzak)
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2011 10:07:39 -0800
Subject: Bugzilla 3.6.3 - graphical reports not working even after
 installing all the dependant perl modules
In-Reply-To: <GKGdndSTBLxlMv7QnZ2dnUVZ_gGdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
References: <GKGdndSTBLxlMv7QnZ2dnUVZ_gGdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTim6CHdN3y_K6eyPg-OEhaLAtj8JYbDxX81rh-aP@mail.gmail.com>

You probably need
ImageMagick<http://www.imagemagick.org/index.php?ImageMagick=11r9lnu9h0fcuhapapdmuj4n65>
as
well as several other plugins related to
iImageMagick<http://www.imagemagick.org/index.php?ImageMagick=11r9lnu9h0fcuhapapdmuj4n65>,
such as some font libraries.  I'd need more details to tell you more.
*
*
*-Guy
*
On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 4:45 AM, thechennaidude <user at mozilla-xp.com/>wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I have installed Bugzilla 3.6.3 on Win XP. I am trying to generate
> graphical reports but I get exceptions related to the unavailability of the
> Graphical Reports feature. I confirmed that all the Perl modules are
> installed by executing checksetup.pl.
>
> Can you someone help me?
>
> Thanks...
> ---
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
> dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla
> -
> To view or change your list settings, click here:
> <http://bugzilla.org/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr?user=guy.pyrzak at gmail.com>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bugzilla.org/pipermail/developers/attachments/20110222/4fb5715e/attachment.html>

From lpsolit at gmail.com  Tue Feb 22 18:13:45 2011
From: lpsolit at gmail.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Fr=E9d=E9ric_Buclin?=)
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2011 19:13:45 +0100
Subject: Bugzilla 3.6.3 - graphical reports not working even after installing
 all the dependant perl modules
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTim6CHdN3y_K6eyPg-OEhaLAtj8JYbDxX81rh-aP@mail.gmail.com>
References: <GKGdndSTBLxlMv7QnZ2dnUVZ_gGdnZ2d@mozilla.org> <AANLkTim6CHdN3y_K6eyPg-OEhaLAtj8JYbDxX81rh-aP@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4D63FCD9.6070003@gmail.com>

> You probably need
> ImageMagick<http://www.imagemagick.org/index.php?ImageMagick=11r9lnu9h0fcuhapapdmuj4n65>

No, Bugzilla doesn't use ImageMagick at all to generate graphical reports.

Anyway, this is a support question, and you should rather ask your
question to the support mailing-list, see http://www.bugzilla.org/support/.

LpSolit


From user at mozilla-xp.com/  Wed Feb 23 07:07:30 2011
From: user at mozilla-xp.com/ (thechennaidude)
Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2011 01:07:30 -0600
Subject: Bugzilla 3.6.3 - graphical reports not working even after
	installing all the dependant perl modules
References: <GKGdndSTBLxlMv7QnZ2dnUVZ_gGdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
Message-ID: <z-mdnRy4uLKvL_nQnZ2dnUVZ_vudnZ2d@mozilla.org>

Thanks for the information...


_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla


From gerv at mozilla.org  Wed Feb 23 11:24:13 2011
From: gerv at mozilla.org (Gervase Markham)
Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2011 16:54:13 +0530
Subject: Bugzilla in Summer of Code?
Message-ID: <btidnY18Iar5c_nQnZ2dnUVZ_rKdnZ2d@mozilla.org>

Hi Bugzilla team,

Are any of you interested in submitting a proposal for a Summer of Code 
project for Bugzilla this year, and mentoring it?
https://wiki.mozilla.org/Community:SummerOfCode11:Brainstorming

Guy Pyrzak mentored a project last year.

If you aren't able to mentor, can you think of appropriately-sized 
chunks of work that could be suggested for others to mentor?

Gerv
_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla


From lpsolit at gmail.com  Sun Feb 27 14:59:50 2011
From: lpsolit at gmail.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Fr=E9d=E9ric_Buclin?=)
Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2011 15:59:50 +0100
Subject: Reminder: Bugzilla meeting this Tuesday, March 1, 2011
Message-ID: <4D6A66E6.6070902@gmail.com>

Hi all,

A quick reminder that our next Bugzilla meeting will take place this
Tuesday, March 1, 2011 at 11:00 PST (19:00 GMT, 20:00 CET) on IRC in the
irc.mozilla.org/bugzilla-meeting channel.

I just updated the agenda a few minutes ago:

 https://wiki.mozilla.org/Bugzilla:Meetings

For those who plan to participate, especially core developers, please be
on time so that we don't need to delay the meeting once more. ;)


LpSolit


From mkanat at bugzilla.org  Mon Feb 28 04:03:46 2011
From: mkanat at bugzilla.org (Max Kanat-Alexander)
Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2011 20:03:46 -0800
Subject: Reminder: Bugzilla meeting this Tuesday, March 1, 2011
In-Reply-To: <4D6A66E6.6070902@gmail.com>
References: <4D6A66E6.6070902@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4D6B1EA2.7020705@bugzilla.org>

On 02/27/2011 06:59 AM, Fr?d?ric Buclin wrote:
> A quick reminder that our next Bugzilla meeting will take place this
> Tuesday, March 1, 2011 at 11:00 PST (19:00 GMT, 20:00 CET) on IRC in the
> irc.mozilla.org/bugzilla-meeting channel.

	Hmm, I just looked at my calendar and realized that I have an
appointment 1.5 hours after this time. So I could come for an hour and a
half, but not more. Should we reschedule?

	-Max
-- 
http://www.bugzillasource.com/
Competent, Friendly Bugzilla, Perl, and IT Services


From lpsolit at gmail.com  Mon Feb 28 10:49:08 2011
From: lpsolit at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?RnLDqWTDqXJpYyBCdWNsaW4=?=)
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 11:49:08 +0100
Subject: Reminder: Bugzilla meeting this Tuesday, March 1, 2011
In-Reply-To: <4D6B1EA2.7020705@bugzilla.org>
References: <4D6A66E6.6070902@gmail.com> <4D6B1EA2.7020705@bugzilla.org>
Message-ID: <4D6B7DA4.3070500@gmail.com>

Le 28. 02. 11 05:03, Max Kanat-Alexander a ?crit :
> 	Hmm, I just looked at my calendar and realized that I have an
> appointment 1.5 hours after this time. So I could come for an hour and a
> half, but not more. Should we reschedule?

If you are on time for the meeting, 1.5 hours should be enough. :) Look
at the agenda: I think 10 minutes per item is enough, especially for the
first few items. And we can postpone the last few remaining items for
another meeting if necessary.

LpSolit


From mkanat at bugzilla.org  Mon Feb 28 11:53:23 2011
From: mkanat at bugzilla.org (Max Kanat-Alexander)
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 03:53:23 -0800
Subject: Bugzilla:Pretty deadline extended to March 7
Message-ID: <4D6B8CB3.809@bugzilla.org>

	Hey folks! I've extended the deadline for the Bugzilla:Pretty contest
to March 7. The reason is that we had a lot going on around the 4.0
release and I didn't have the space to remind people that the deadline
was coming up, and the last time I reminded people was a month ago, so
it might have slipped some people's minds. So to make sure that
everybody gets a chance to participate who wanted to, March 7 is now the
new hard deadline.

	For anybody wondering, "March 7" lasts until 11:59:59pm on March 7,
2011 in the Pacific (America/Los_Angeles) timezone. So any entries from
before that time will be accepted.

	By the way, our current entries are pretty amazing, it's going to be a
tough contest:

	https://wiki.mozilla.org/Bugzilla:Pretty
	

	-Max
-- 
http://www.bugzillasource.com/
Competent, Friendly Bugzilla, Perl, and IT Services


From mkanat at bugzilla.org  Mon Feb 28 11:54:39 2011
From: mkanat at bugzilla.org (Max Kanat-Alexander)
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 03:54:39 -0800
Subject: Reminder: Bugzilla meeting this Tuesday, March 1, 2011
In-Reply-To: <4D6B7DA4.3070500@gmail.com>
References: <4D6A66E6.6070902@gmail.com> <4D6B1EA2.7020705@bugzilla.org> <4D6B7DA4.3070500@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4D6B8CFF.50103@bugzilla.org>

On 02/28/2011 02:49 AM, Fr?d?ric Buclin wrote:
> If you are on time for the meeting, 1.5 hours should be enough. :) Look
> at the agenda: I think 10 minutes per item is enough, especially for the
> first few items. And we can postpone the last few remaining items for
> another meeting if necessary.

	Okay, sounds great to me.

	-Max
-- 
http://www.bugzillasource.com/
Competent, Friendly Bugzilla, Perl, and IT Services