path: root/developer-doc/phb/error-mgmt.docbook

<chapter id="problem-mgmt">
<title>Problem Management</title>
<para>
This chapter is a first draft. It contains some ideas that have to be 
validated by the developer community.
</para>

<sect1 id="problem-reporting">
<title>Reporting problems</title>
<para>
Problems (that covers errors, enhancement request, etc.) concerning the
&app; project are maintained
using the SourceForge.net platform. This is the sole location, where
problems have to be reported. The source for such a problem report can be
one of the developers or any other user of &app;.
</para>

<sect2 id="problem-reference">
<title>Referencing problems</title>
<para>
Once added to the database, the problem will be assigned a unique problem
number. This number must be mentioned whenever the problem is referenced
(e.g. in the subject of a mail to the developer mailing-list, a checkin
comment or an entry in the ChangeLog file). To allow searches for the number,
a specific format has to be used for these references.

The format is
<command>#<emphasis>assigned-number</emphasis></command>, e.g. #481229.
</para>
</sect2>
</sect1>


<sect1 id="problem-attributes">
<title>Problem attributes</title>
<para>
Besides the fixed problem number which is created when the report is filed,
 each
problem has a couple of attributes that might change during the
life-cycle of the problem. They will be described in the following
chapters.
</para>

<sect2 id="problem-reported-by">
<title>Reported By</title>
<para>
As the problem number, this field is fix. It represents the SourceForge
username of the individual who filed the report.
</para>
</sect2>

<sect2 id="problem-severity-level">
<title>Severity level</title>
<para>
The SourceForge.net platform allows to assign a severity level to each
problem. It ranges from 1 to 10. The meaning in our project and the
consequences are defined as follows:

</para> <para> FIXME: A more detailed description of the prios needs to be given

<orderedlist>
<listitem>
<para>
Lowest priority
</para>
</listitem>

<listitem>
<para>
TBD!
</para>
</listitem>

<listitem>
<para>
TBD!
</para>
</listitem>

<listitem>
<para>
TBD!
</para>
</listitem>

<listitem>
<para>
Medium priority (default)
</para>
</listitem>

<listitem>
<para>
TBD!
</para>
</listitem>

<listitem>
<para>
TBD!
</para>
</listitem>

<listitem>
<para>
TBD!
</para>
</listitem>

<listitem>
<para>
TBD!
</para>
</listitem>

<listitem>
<para>
Highest priority
</para>
</listitem>

</orderedlist>
</para>
</sect2>

<sect2 id="problem-area">
<title>Area</title>
<para>
TBD!
</para>
</sect2>

<sect2 id="problem-assignee">
<title>Assignee</title>
<para>
This field represents the SourceForge.net username of the individual
working on the problem. Each developer should pick problems he feels
competent to work on. The possibility to assign another developer to a
problem should be used only to gather a comment from this developer. This
should be clearly marked as comment with the report.
</para>

<note>
<para>
The number of unassigned problem reports should be 0 most of the time to
give clear signal to the world that the developers are working on the
project!
</para>
</note>
</sect2>

<sect2 id="problem-status">
<title>Status</title>
<para>
Each problem has a status. Right after filing a report, it will be assigned
the status 'open' automatically by the SourceForge.net platform. Whenever a
developer is working on the problem, he will have to modifiy the value of
this field to reflect the current status. The following values are
available and have the associated meaning:
</para>

<para>

<table>
<title>Available problem status values</title>
<tgroup cols="2">
<thead>
<row>
<entry>Status</entry>
<entry>Meaning</entry>
</row>
</thead>

<tbody>
<row>
<entry>open</entry>
<entry>
The problem is not yet fixed. A developer might be working on it.
</entry>
</row>

<row>
<entry>closed</entry>
<entry>
The problem has been closed. No further action is required.
</entry>
</row>

<row>
<entry>deleted</entry>
<entry>
???
</entry>
</row>

<row>
<entry>pending</entry>
<entry>
The problem has been modified solved and feedback from the original poster
is required. Pending entries will turn into closed entries after 14 days.
</entry>
</row>

</tbody>
</tgroup>
</table>

</para>
</sect2>


<sect2 id="problem-resolution">
<title>Resolution</title>
<para>
The following values are available and have the associated meaning:
</para>
<para>

<table>
<title>Available problem resolution values</title>
<tgroup cols="2">
<thead>
<row>
<entry>Resolution</entry>
<entry>Meaning</entry>
</row>
</thead>

<tbody>
<row>
<entry>Accepted</entry>
<entry>
The problem report has been accepted by the developers. Nevertheless, it
has not yet been duplicated but from the initial report it could well
be a problem with &app;
</entry>
</row>

<row>
<entry>Duplicated</entry>
<entry>
The problem has been duplicated by one of the developers.
</entry>
</row>

<row>
<entry>Fixed</entry>
<entry>
The problem has been fixed. The code is available via CVS.
</entry>
</row>

<row>
<entry>Invalid</entry>
<entry>
The report is not valid. It's not a problem related to &app;.
</entry>
</row>

<row>
<entry>Later</entry>
<entry>
???
</entry>
</row>

<row>
<entry>None</entry>
<entry>
???
</entry>
</row>

<row>
<entry>Out of date</entry>
<entry>
The report is based on an older version of &app; and has been resolved
in the meantime in a newer release which is available for download or CVS.
</entry>
</row>

<row>
<entry>Postponed</entry>
<entry>
The problem has been acknowledged but will be postponed until later. The
developer changeing the state to Postponed should leave a comment with the
entry why it is postponed.
</entry>
</row>

<row>
<entry>Rejected</entry>
<entry>
The problem has been rejected by the development team. The developer
changing the state to Rejected should leave a comment with the entry
nameing the reasons for rejection.
</entry>
</row>

<row>
<entry>Remind</entry>
<entry>
???
</entry>
</row>

<row>
<entry>Wont fix</entry>
<entry>
???
</entry>
</row>

<row>
<entry>Works for me</entry>
<entry>
The problem cannot be duplicated but seems to be a valid problem. The
entry needs more investigation.
</entry>
</row>

</tbody>
</tgroup>
</table>

</para>
</sect2>

</sect1>
</chapter>