AGA, how much power do you have to modify the issue tracker? There are couple of things I think would be beneficial:
1. Add "Category" filter option to the Search bar.
2. Add "Rejected" and "Duplicate" to the list of issue statuses.
ALSO:
3. Make options in "Category" list sorted in alphabetic order (when editing the issue).
You're set up as an admin, so you see what I see as far as the tracker is concerned. If you can't work out how to change something, neither can I.
Anything that can't be done by an admin would require hacking the code. Unfortunately the project itself seems to be dead, so any hacks would have to be made ourselves. I might take a look at some point if necessary, but I'm not promising anything. SMF coding is far from fun!
I'd be willing to take a look at the code as well if wanted :).
Would it not be better to use the github tracker? Since issues can be tied to commits and so on.
Quote from: Calin Leafshade on Fri 05/04/2013 15:12:41
Would it not be better to use the github tracker? Since issues can be tied to commits and so on.
I think, relatively, ags tracker has more options to organize features requests.
Ideally, I'd like to have some serious tracker like Mantis (JJS used that one at earlier stages of port development).
I deliberately used the SMF based one due to the forum integration. Having a bug tracker for a project based on another,unconnected, site like github is silly. Mantis would be nice to have, but that would lack the integration with the forums, which I think is a good thing to have to encourage use by all members of the community, not just the development nerds.
I would ideally like to have all the AGS dev branches hosted on a locally hosted git server too, but I haven't yet got around to setting one up. Plus I'm not sure how willing everyone would be to buy into using it.
Well, I think that ags tracker is fine as it is for the purpose of giving forum members an opportunity to post their requests.
Such trackers as Mantis are good for developers, but their look alone may confuse less experienced people :).