Re: PATCH keyword, again

On Tue, 2003-12-30 at 16:02, Jeff Waugh wrote:
> <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. ;-)

Yeah, it's definitely worth sending patches to maintainers or grabbing
them on IRC. If I was a maintainer, I'd look at personal mail before yet
more of that bugmail :-)

> 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. :-)

The GNOME bugzilla is huge, and the bugsquad's "best" isn't always good
enough. Just as it's hard for maintainers to keep up with, we sometimes
have the same problem!

Also, we don't worry about bugs so much when they have patches. If the
patch is going stale or the bug particularly nasty we might moan
(pointed comments like "Can this *please* be reviewed!") and we
generally jump up the priority but in general we try to classify bad
bugs and get enough information that they can be reproduced and fixed.
If the bug is well-filed and getting patches, it's going out of our

Andrew Sobala <aes gnome org>

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

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