Re: PATCH keyword, again

<quote who="Christian Neumair">

> > You said above "so nobody feels responsible"... *Your* energy can kick
> > it off. :-)
> Although I really appreciate that there are possibilities to qualify,
> shouldn't maintainers *always* take a serious look at Bugzilla themselves
> since this is an important source for quality assurance information. It
> should never be neglected. Famous projects like Ephy usually heavily rely
> on Bugzilla.

Sometimes, Bugzilla is fundamentally overwhelming for maintainers, so having
people go through and help categorise, prioritise and so on is enormously
useful. I know for sure that this is a problem with Nautilus. It has a huuge
amount of bugs that need grokking, and Alex has said a number of times that
it is far to much for one (or two) people to handle. Helpers required. Nauti
is probably a special case, due to historical neglect and, um, number of
bugs and feature requests possible. ;-)

This is ostensibly what the bug team is for, but I'm not sure how active it
is at the moment. It is (generally) not a failing of maintainers that there
are patches and unloved bugs in bugzilla - far too often it's just overload
and lack of clarity. We need more people hammering on bugzilla to make life
easier for maintainers, so they can concentrate on the software issues. :-)

- Jeff

GVADEC 2004: Kristiansand, Norway          
   I must be getting old... Buying toothpaste with gel in it is no longer
                           an Absolute Necessity.

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]