* xor <xor at gmx.li> [2009-08-16 17:33:15]: > On Sunday 16 August 2009 16:38:15 NextGen$ wrote: > > Hi, > > > > What are you doing here? starting an edit-war on the bug tracker? > > Editing the priority/milestone of loads of tickets won't help to get them > > implemented... and it is spamming our inboxes (I'm still subscribed to > > most, like most of us). > > > > - People are complaining about the bug tracker being bloated and unusable, > therefore I'm trying to work 1hour+ every day on cleaning it up. That is > good, > isn't it? >
I'm not so sure about that. Who's been complaining exactly? Mostly people not using it. A bug tracking software is a tool intended to be used by developpers; One of the main problems we have is that we intend to make non-developpers use it by asking *users* to report bugs there. > - As you've experienced, all changes I am doing are being reported by mail to > the other developers, so I am not doing anything hidden, it is publicly > reviewed. So if you do not agree with any of my changes, feel free to revert > them. > I disagree with most of what has been done today, on the bug tracker, by you. Hence my email. > - When setting milestones/target versions/priorities, of course that is a > *suggestion* by me, and I only do it for issue where I am very certain about > it. I want to help in getting an overview of what might be nice for 0.8.If > you > do not agree, please revert. > The thing is, I don't have one hour a day to spend reverting your modifications. > > Changing the priority of tickets you've no business with whatsoever (you're > > neither a reporter, not a contributor to that part of the code, nor even > > subscribed to the ticket) is just unacceptable. > > I am only changing the issues which seem easy to judge for a non-fred-core- > developer. Take that one in particular: NAT-PMP support: It's reasonably easy to do (I've implemented the up&p one: I know what I'm talking about), it would improve the "reachability" of a significant number of nodes (all of those behind Apple's routers at least). Connectivity of the nodes has proven, on all p2p networks to be a key factor in efficiency (just read the literature about it if common sense isn't enough) ... and yet you're judging it's useless. > I consider this as very useful: People who have deep knowledge in > how the node works should spend their time on doing stuff where that > knowledge > is *required* - it would suck very much if toad had to spend his time on > resolving trivial issues which someone who has absolutely no knowledge of the > node's internals (such as me) can resolve! > So, if I'm following your logic, you've lowered the priority from "normal" to "none", on the basis that it's not core stuffs and that toad shouldn't work on it according to you. Is the only purpose of the bug tracker to be toad's glorified todo list? As far as I know, he's grown up enough to maintain his own. > Anyway, as you've been demanding to drop all contents of the bugtracker - I > think it's better if a person who has "no business with whatsoever" cleans it > up than just having all of the bugtracker be deleted. I don't. Starting from the grounds up would at least clear things up "properly" and allow the project to define a policy on how to handle bug reports. For instance, as I wrote before, users shoudln't be the one filling in bug tickets on the bug tracker. For them we need another, simpler, possibly anonymous tool.
