[OSM-talk] Unification of OpenStreetBugs an Trac

Christoph Böhme christoph at b3e.net
Thu Dec 4 17:24:33 GMT 2008

"Andy Allan" <gravitystorm at gmail.com> schrieb:

> On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 12:10 AM, Christoph Böhme <christoph at b3e.net>
> wrote:
> > At the moment I am trying to figure out if bug reports reports can
> > be stored directly in the osm database using standard nodes and
> > tags.
> Please, please don't take or advocate this approach. The OSM core
> tables should, ideally, contain geo-data. We already anticipate much
> of the meta-data (e.g. created_by tags, usernames) to be applied to
> changesets (which are in themselves natively metadata). There's been a
> long and steady agreement that future bug tracking systems won't just
> slap nodes into the midst of our geotables.

I was not aware of this agreement. When I first started thinking about
a bug tracker I intended to keep the bug reports in data structures
separate from the osm database. But in the following discussions I got
the feeling that a bug tracker which allowed free-form tagging would be
very welcomed. But implementing this means basically replicating the
node-objects (and the way-objects too if you want to mark buggy areas).
So, I concluded it would be the easiest to just introduce a new set of
tags and manage them differently in the clients. However, I can see why
this is not a very clean solution and I am happy to implement in a
different dataset.

> However, this is another subject that needs more doing and less
> talking :-)

I am really eager to start programming something but at the moment I am
still trying to figure out what exactly. I do not want to spend time
writing a bug tracker that is then rejected because of the way it
stores the bug reports.


More information about the talk mailing list