On 1/18/06, Federico Mena Quintero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, 2006-01-16 at 16:14 -0500, Luis Villa wrote: > > > JWZ is an ass, and has been for a long time. If forced to take the > > admittedly unpleasant choice between overwhelming maintainers so that > > they never look at bugzilla at all, or incorrectly closing bugs which > > might be reopened later, we should *always* choose the second option. > > In defense of asses, JWZ's bug reports tend to be detailed and he'll > happily follow up on them if you ask nicely. I know because I fixed > some of them.
Oh, his reports are great, and I wish more people were like him in that respect. That doesn't mean he isn't an ass :) > His tantrum was on our extremely irresponsible transition from 1.x to > 2.0, where no one bothered to see if there were regressions, we didn't > provide a migration path for user's settings, we didn't write migration > documents for all the APIs that got replaced, and we just shoved > everything under the rug. No, that's not what his tantrum was about: http://www.jwz.org/doc/cadt.html Luis > The bugsquad (did it exist then?) was probably not as good as it is now, > etc. etc., but we cannot say "uh, I guess it may be fixed now" every > time we switch versions. This includes minor and micro versions. > > If a bug has good info on how to reproduce a crash, and the code has > changed so much that the provided stack trace is not relevant anymore, > it is up to the maintainer to attempt to reproduce the crash with the > original instructions, and close the bug if it is irreproducible. > > If a bug has only a stack trace and no info on how to reproduce it, feel > free to mark it NEEDINFO immediately, or even INCOMPLETE/INVALID. > > Speaking of GStreamer... > > We should probably start to become stricter on API/ABI stability for the > desktop suite, not only the platform suite. Users only see our desktop, > never the platform; if the desktop breaks because a desktop-only library > broke things, users will think that GNOME sucks as a whole. > > I'm thinking that we need to change our release model a bit, so that we > have a user branch and a developer/experimental branch at all times, and > it is ONLY the ongoing user branch that we ship to distros and thus > users. > > Federico > > _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list