Luigi Bai wrote: > Stefano Mazzocchi wrote: > >> > >> Maybe it is more precise to say "When shit works /mostly/ well...". The > >> presence of a large number of outstanding Bugzilla issues, especially ones > >> with [PATCH]es attached, implies that things work well for committers, less > >> well for those of us who have to wait until "someone just gets around to > >> it". Fixing bugs isn't sexy, like Flow or Forms or Real Blocks. But it > >> should happen every once in a while, especially when other people have > >> already proposed the patches. > > > > If you have ideas on how to make it better, we are wide open to suggestions. > > Okay, assuming your sincerity - what is the current method for committers > to find/fix/close issues in Bugzilla? Are votes used, or longest time > open, number of comments? How often are these criteria applied > (periodically, only FirstFriday, only before release)? > > Knowing these, we can figure out a way to improve the system, or the > users's expectations (or both!).
None of the things that you mentioned are really criteria. Bugs get addressed and patches applied when a committer finds some spare time and jumps in to address them. Contributers can ease this process by clearly describing their issues and using sensible bug titles to attract attention. All of us, committers and contributers, need to review the contributions. Don't just leave it up to the poor overworked committers. When other developers review the patches and issues, then add constructive comments, that would help immensely. A side-effect of that is to send an automated message to the dev list, which reminds committers of the importance. -- David Crossley
