The first conclusion I get from this debate is that I will think it twice before resolving a bug report as MOVED Brainstorm.

In my opinion there are cases where Brainstorm is better.

- When a feature request might have different solutions. Maybe for Nokia is a wontfix but then an alternatived solution shows up and the feature goes through implementation.

- When there is controversy also at a community level.

- When someone has a proposal about a missing feature but doesn't know much about how to implement it.

If a proposal shows up in the Brainstorm and it's actually a duplicated from an enhancement request in bugzilla, by default the resolution would be MOVED Brainstorm. There might be exceptions e.g. Ogg Support out of the box, where all possible discussion has been discussed.

Indeed, nothing stops from enhancements in bugzilla to flower into a Brainstorm idea.
Nothing, also, stops the opposite from happening.

Depends. The community gets a lot of support from Nokia, but that isn't the same as "sponsorship". Some members of the community get sponsored to travel to events like the summit; other members of the community work for Nokia; other members of the community are self-employed, but paid by Nokia, to work on maemo.org; Nokia pays the bills for maemo.org, but the vast the Maemo community have no direct financial benefit from Nokia.

Sorry, but this kind of attitude really annoys me. Do you think the members of the community who've been involved since 2005 don't realise that an increased market penetration will change things? Do you think that the vast majority of us old-timers don't want more users, more developers, more applications and more exposure for Maemo?

It's not like people are going out of their way to make things bad. Improvements are iterative. Things are sub-optimal. So, we look; assess; evaluate and suggest improvements for the next iteration. maemo.org is very much "release-early and release-often".

Good that this is discussed a bit more and that i see i am not the only one that finds this fragmentations confusing.

Let me say that i get brainstorm. but that i just dont agree with that bugzilla is getting a resolved state (moved) to brainstorm..

I think bugzilla should be always leading and then for a brainstorm topic there should be or should end up in (if it leads to something) to a bugzilla issue (enhancement)

This way bugzilla is always leading and brainstorm is just an extra interface for the (initial) discussion. You can always have a link both ways pointing to each other.

Maybe someone could make a sync tool so that brainstorm comments are somehow also added as comments to bugzilla so that it is really in the end in 1 place?

Resolved does not always mean "solved altogether"-- it can mean "out of scope for this environ" too. Maybe though we just need a better term for that sort of situation?

If something moves from Bugzilla to Brainstorm and then stalls, that's certainly an issue to tackle... but I don't think it negates the option of "resolving" such an issue in Bugzilla.

I agree the current approach seems very fragmented. The need for separate logins for them all, doesn't help either (although, if I've understood correctly, work is in process to resolve this issue, which is really good ). Anyway, here is my idea:

Why not have a separate "Idea" (or something like that) forum in Talk where anyone can post a new idea or enhancement request? After the initial discussion it could be decided whether a Brainstorm or Bugzilla should be created for it. Also there it could be pointed out that a solution already exists or it can be resolved in Talk thread with no further action required. This way the end-user who has an idea/enhancement request wouldn't need to worry where it belongs and, with a simple Talk search, he can find out quickly if it has been already discussed.

In other words:

1. End-user has an idea/enhancement request
2. He makes a search in Talk to find out if it already exists
3. Makes a new thread about it in "Idea"
4. Initial discussion to see if a Brainstorm or Bugzilla is needed
5. Opening Brainstorm or Bugzilla

I second sasler!

I came along various threads with just requests for something, where actually no brainstorm is needed as the problem might be specific or does not need any brainstorm as the solutions are well known and it should be up to developers which they find easiest or most challenging (I know both folks...) to implement.

if its feature, program or protocol doesn't matter... e.g. I'd like to have a XMPP client capable of gpg ssl and so on and be able to use the full sized protocol... would mean we have a plugin for conversations doing that? we might but it could be solved with pidgin first and extend to be integrated later... who cares as long as something happens, we get satisfied and might be surprised as well.

As said by sasler: it might need a brainstorm/bugreport but its not a must have in many cases.

Maybe we just create a new thread prefix for discussions in this subforum, that doesn't apply to the actual Brainstorm tool. Call it [Incubator].

If a Brainstorm emerges from an Incubator thread, great-- if no elects to take it on, then the thread is closed at some pont.

just... brainstorming.

give it cookies!

Incubator would be for brainstorming, but what to brainstorm? A problem? I see a lot of questions being posted... brainstorm should stick to the problem+solution case. I want something to be realized but don't know how or am not a coder, I dont know where it fits and dont know who to ask. There brainstorm comes to play. for example I thought of how usefull a constellation tool would be and got brainstormed, feature needs, apps that might be worth a port and so on... the same goes for my cryptography-storm! thats what brainstorm is for me...
its not the place asking for minor features or for plugins for existing frameworks, but it happens quiet a lot. Even asking questions happens from time to time, those threads need to go somewhere else.

the split between bugtracker and brainstorm is both good and bad.
maybe some bugs should be discussed in talk.brainstorm but do not need a brainstorm item.
enhancement and feature dev should go here as well; if the dev-team thinks they need some brainstorm done (crowd sourcing in some way). The thread starter must be one of the dev-team!

But some things just dont fit at the first stage! Maybe later but thats up to the developers looking in to it! Means...
App porting requests "I want that program over here could someone have a look please." maybe the answer is "We got another doing the same already! Which feature are you missing?" or "Hmm good idea I will have a look". Later on the developer starts a brainstorm item and puts in various solutions he found worth a look as well and is not sure which to choose as the features divide. Here the brainstorm item gets opened by developers and should go to under consideration instantly.

Feature requests fit to "Applications" or "Plattform". Is there a subforum needed?

just... brainstorming.

You are about to propose what Brainstorm is supposed to do:

- Creating a new brainstorm creates automatically a new Talk thread. You call it "idea"? Fine.

- A new brainstorm/idea starts in the Sandbox. You call it "incubator"? Fine.

Note that Brainstorm is not only useful to see how different solutions are discussed and evaluated. Even if a Brainstorm has only one solution it is interesting to see whether it gets enough support to get out of the Sandbox/Incubator and then it's also useful to see when a single solution is seconded by 11 or 1011 voters, if the thumbs up/down ratio is 99%, 1% or 50% and so on.