I'm likewise, William, but I think that all users can add some value by
wandering through the open issue list and seeing if we can improve
things by clearing issues that are known to be resolved, testing old
issues against current versions of SCons, etc. Dirk, I've started
traipsing through the open bugs, looking for things I think already are
fixed, or verifying if issues are still present, and commenting
accordingly. At 4 issues a day it'd be 3 months before the open issues
list has boiled down to nothing, but hopefully just keeping a downward
trend on this for a period will feel worthwhile.
The roadmap is a high-level thing, and doesn't explain for example what
triggered the 2.3.2 release, which I'm interested in understanding.
Cheers,
Andrew
P.S. on the homepage the links to the individual mailing lists point to
the old Tigris ones. Can they point at the Mailman-based ones instead?
On Mon, 07 Jul 2014 02:48:39 +0100, William Blevins
<wblevins...@gmail.com> wrote:
I'm a bit green around the SCons code base, but I agree with Andrew
that the Tigris bug tracking looks *scary* at a glance. I would be
willing to help if I know enough to be helpful.
As a side note, I started to some discussions about Java toolchain
issues and I will get back on those; got side-tracked with the
performance conversations, but some profiles came out of it which I
thought were helpful.
V/R,
William
On Sun, Jul 6, 2014 at 5:19 PM, Dirk Bächle <tshor...@gmx.de
<mailto:tshor...@gmx.de>> wrote:
Andrew,
On 06.07.2014 22:25, Andrew Featherstone wrote:
Hi Dirk,
Ok it's good to know where to be looking. For me the number
of open issues gives a (false) negative impression that the
project's development is stale. For me, P1 bugs are triaged
as "is an issue which causes detrimental behaviour (e.g.
deletes source code, compiles source code with different
flags, misses changes in source code), and must be fixed in
the next release". Only two of the P1 issues have been
commented on in the past two years, and some have sat still
since 2009! As I said, this is confusing at best to someone
who wants to get a feel for the current status of an open
source project.
I can only agree. ;) That's why I started to do something about
it...would you like to help?
Moving forwards it'd be nice to know that tackling issues in
the issue tracker is worthwhile, that comments don't go
unread, etc. Who marks what issues must be fixed for the
next version? Is there any plan for existing issues to be
updated? Do the developers communicate through the issue
tracker or some other method e.g. IRC?
Regarding issues there is no real planning or update process in
place. We used to have a triaging process (BugParty) via IRC, on
a bi-weekly basis...but with the dwindling number of core
developers it petered out.
At the moment, the development version is quite stable. I don't
know of any showstopper bugs that would have to get fixed
immediately (no P1 issues).
The few really serious issues get discussed and assigned here on
the dev ML. We also have a small roadmap at
http://scons.org/wiki/Roadmap ...aaand that's it, I guess.
Regards,
Dirk
_______________________________________________
Scons-dev mailing list
Scons-dev@scons.org <mailto:Scons-dev@scons.org>
http://two.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
_______________________________________________
Scons-dev mailing list
Scons-dev@scons.org
http://two.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
