Re: Importing from Mindview worth our time??
Hi Joel, *, On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 12:36 AM, Joel Madero jmadero@gmail.com wrote: I am really hesitant to support just having so many bugs floating around like this. I think that marking as RESOLVED - WONTFIX enables devs to look at these if they are ever inclined to do s But doesn't really match. The resolution that fits best for sure, but I would never search wontfix bugs for stuff to do when I have too much spare time :-) There should be an additional status-whiteboard label to search for like patcheswelcome or similar. ciao Christian ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: Importing from Mindview worth our time??
On Fri, 2012-06-29 at 17:35 -0700, Joel Madero wrote: One of my mein concerns is that we aren't keeping up with bug reports so we may close a bug at eol without anyone from QA or any developer ever looking at it. To me this seems unfair to the reporter. We could append a statement about - due to the volume of bug reports, help triaging issues is much appreciated (or something). Hopefully we can get a duplicate-finder working for the submission assistant, and/or encourage some basic de-duplication during filing that may help (?) :-) If that helps ? Michael. -- michael.me...@suse.com , Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: Importing from Mindview worth our time??
Michael, not quite sure where you're talking about putting that statement. Noel, agreed, but I think we can be better than that ;) My goal is and continues to be to have all bug statuses correct by the end of the year and then to never have a bug go UNCONFIRMED for more than a month (maybe 2) I like the idea of a whiteboard status along with WONTFIX and a comment to the bug reporter. How does everyone feel about that? We could put WONTFIX with a message to the reporter that states. Unfortunately because of the limited number of developers and the minimal impact that this enhancement will have on our user base we have decided to mark this bug as WONTFIX. We have added a whiteboard status of PATCHESWELCOME so if one of the developers ever have time or the desire they can look this up. Then of course we can be more detailed to specific requests like this one, such as saying the software is closed source and would be really difficult to implement. Joel On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 1:53 AM, Michael Meeks michael.me...@suse.comwrote: On Fri, 2012-06-29 at 17:35 -0700, Joel Madero wrote: One of my mein concerns is that we aren't keeping up with bug reports so we may close a bug at eol without anyone from QA or any developer ever looking at it. To me this seems unfair to the reporter. We could append a statement about - due to the volume of bug reports, help triaging issues is much appreciated (or something). Hopefully we can get a duplicate-finder working for the submission assistant, and/or encourage some basic de-duplication during filing that may help (?) :-) If that helps ? Michael. -- michael.me...@suse.com , Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: Importing from Mindview worth our time??
Hi Joel, On Sat, 2012-06-30 at 08:38 -0700, Joel Madero wrote: Michael, not quite sure where you're talking about putting that statement. :-) in the message when we close it. We could put WONTFIX with a message to the reporter that states. So - I start to like the bravery and sanity of this approach the more I think about it :-) Unfortunately because of the limited number of developers and the minimal impact that this enhancement will have on our user base we have decided to mark this bug as WONTFIX. We have added a whiteboard status of PATCHESWELCOME so if one of the developers ever have time or the desire they can look this up. Let me re-phrase that; how about this (for anything that is not a completely crack smoking non-feature eg. why not Integrate Outlook Express ;-) - I write a mail like this regularly in reply to our info@ alias which tends to get similar feature suggestions :-) Thank you for your feature suggestion. LibreOffice is a voluntary project, if you would like to develop this feature, we would love to invest our time in integrating you and your work into the project. However, at the present time it seems unlikely that this issue will find volunteers to tackle it, so we will close it WONTFIX (for now), and have added a PATCHESWELCOME whiteboard status to make it easy for others to find in the future if they have spare time and a shortage of good ideas. More wordy - but perhaps more welcoming ? :-) Then of course we can be more detailed to specific requests like this one, such as saying the software is closed source and would be really difficult to implement. Yep - makes sense in this specific case: in the absence of a specification, it would take a substantial investment of time to implement this. IMHO it is well worth turning around other people's feature requests into a challenge to get involved with the project :-) Otherwise, I'm well up for WONTFIX'ing that sort of thing to clean it up, and building a suitably friendly encouraging template for that. Thanks for raising thinking this through ! All the best, Michael. -- michael.me...@suse.com , Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: Importing from Mindview worth our time??
On Fri, 2012-06-29 at 14:11 -0700, Joel Madero wrote: I feel like we should close it as WONTFIX. Reasons: 5. Not one other user has posted on the bug since its creation 5+ months ago request: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44606list_id=88922 There isn't anything anything IMO anything very wrong about the bug, but I agree that it just isn't going to happen, unless someone happens to really take a sudden interest in it. In fedora we close still-open bugs reported against fedora versions three (or so) releases earlier than the current release with a if this still matters to you then test in the current version and reopen it if the problem persists. It's hardly an ideal solution, but it does avoid the accumulation of infinite amounts of bugs. Maybe this is the way to go: cull all bugs reported against versions = 3 older than the current release that haven't had any activity in X months with a polite request to retest that its still broken if it still matters with a few links to commercial support if there's an itch they really want scratched. C. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: Importing from Mindview worth our time??
I am really hesitant to support just having so many bugs floating around like this. I think that marking as RESOLVED - WONTFIX enables devs to look at these if they are ever inclined to do so but makes it clear to the users that we won't be doing this (almost guaranteed). I think if we just keep asking them to update it we give them the hope that there is a chance when in fact there isn't, plus we add that we'll have bugs open for months (year(s)) that won't be fixed ever and then ultimately just go to WILLNOTFIX, when we knew that months prior to changing the status. Joel On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 3:31 PM, Caolán McNamara caol...@redhat.com wrote: On Fri, 2012-06-29 at 14:11 -0700, Joel Madero wrote: I feel like we should close it as WONTFIX. Reasons: 5. Not one other user has posted on the bug since its creation 5+ months ago request: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44606list_id=88922 There isn't anything anything IMO anything very wrong about the bug, but I agree that it just isn't going to happen, unless someone happens to really take a sudden interest in it. In fedora we close still-open bugs reported against fedora versions three (or so) releases earlier than the current release with a if this still matters to you then test in the current version and reopen it if the problem persists. It's hardly an ideal solution, but it does avoid the accumulation of infinite amounts of bugs. Maybe this is the way to go: cull all bugs reported against versions = 3 older than the current release that haven't had any activity in X months with a polite request to retest that its still broken if it still matters with a few links to commercial support if there's an itch they really want scratched. C. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: Importing from Mindview worth our time??
On Fri, 2012-06-29 at 15:36 -0700, Joel Madero wrote: I am really hesitant to support just having so many bugs floating around like this. I think that marking as RESOLVED - WONTFIX enables devs to look at these if they are ever inclined to do so but makes it clear to the users that we won't be doing this. Yup, I agree totally. Its not helpful to have loads of no-hoper bugs floating around. They should be closed with resolved-wontfix. My suggestion is only around the comment and criteria to use when closing them. e.g. here's our fedora-16 one http://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=BugZappers/HouseKeeping/Fedora16#Comment_Text_2 So taking the fedora comment and adjusting it for us, it would look like... LibreOffice ''(major-version}'' changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on ''(date here)''. LibreOffice ''(major-version}'' is no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug. If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of LibreOffice please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed. so for us that would mean anything reported against 3.3.X and 3.4.X is up for mass-closing with the above. C. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: Importing from Mindview worth our time??
One of my mein concerns is that we aren't keeping up with bug reports so we may close a bug at eol without anyone from QA or any developer ever looking at it. To me this seems unfair to the reporter. On Jun 29, 2012 4:00 PM, Caolán McNamara caol...@redhat.com wrote: On Fri, 2012-06-29 at 15:36 -0700, Joel Madero wrote: I am really hesitant to support just having so many bugs floating around like this. I think that marking as RESOLVED - WONTFIX enables devs to look at these if they are ever inclined to do so but makes it clear to the users that we won't be doing this. Yup, I agree totally. Its not helpful to have loads of no-hoper bugs floating around. They should be closed with resolved-wontfix. My suggestion is only around the comment and criteria to use when closing them. e.g. here's our fedora-16 one http://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=BugZappers/HouseKeeping/Fedora16#Comment_Text_2 So taking the fedora comment and adjusting it for us, it would look like... LibreOffice ''(major-version}'' changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on ''(date here)''. LibreOffice ''(major-version}'' is no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug. If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of LibreOffice please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed. so for us that would mean anything reported against 3.3.X and 3.4.X is up for mass-closing with the above. C. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
