[ZWeb] Zope Collector policies?
Hi, I feel there is a mismatch between the policies for the Zope collectors and the text on the entry page of these collectors, which seems to frustrate both users and the developers caring about the collectors. The start page of the zope collectors at http://www.zope.org/Collectors/ just contains a few general sentences, mostly saying that submitters are welcome, and state some rather vague requirements on the bugs. At least for the Zope collector it is not the case that just all submitters are welcome; instead there seems to be a strict policy about submissions requiring: - patches must come with unit test proving the patch fixes some issue - patches for new features must apply to the trunk - bug reports should at least include the traceback - only supported combinations of python/zope are supported, and issues should be reproduceable with a stock Zope installation without add-ons ... (at least I think these are some of the requirements). All users violating the policy are told about their mistake very strictly by Andreas Jung then. However, none of these requirements are mentioned on the start page for the collector. Other projects do have such requirements stated in big letters on their bug trackers front page; these might even include to ask first on the relevant mailing list before reporting a bug. I think its better to tell people in advance that to have to tell them later that their bug report does not meet the checklist. Does anyone share my point of view the collector overview page should state the requirements explicitely? If yes, is there any interest that I try to formulate some alternative text for the front page (which would need to be polished by some native speaker)? Oh, and has anyone pointers to the real collector policies? Cheers, Clemens P.S. apologies if I am on the wrong list - if so, has anyone pointers about a better place to post this? ___ Zope-web maillist - Zope-web@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-web
Re: [ZWeb] Zope Collector policies?
--On 11. April 2006 23:00:01 +0200 Clemens Klein-Robbenhaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi, I feel there is a mismatch between the policies for the Zope collectors and the text on the entry page of these collectors, which seems to frustrate both users and the developers caring about the collectors. I agree. are welcome; instead there seems to be a strict policy about submissions requiring: - patches must come with unit test proving the patch fixes some issue "should come": untested code is basically broken (to cite Stefan Holek). In addition a patch is more likely to be accepted by a supporter if is has tests. - patches for new features must apply to the trunk nothing to add, this is a common rule for Zope 2 and Zope 3 - bug reports should at least include the traceback nothing to add, asking a bunch of times back get the necessary information to get even a clue about a problem is one the most of annoying thing when dealing with bugreports - only supported combinations of python/zope are supported, and issues should be reproduceable with a stock Zope installation without add-ons ... Bascially yes, but we also have an eye on the major frameworks like CMF & Plone. All users violating the policy are told about their mistake very strictly by Andreas Jung then. However, none of these requirements are mentioned on the start page for the collector. ..basically because the collector is often misunderstood as discussion board and helpdesk. Other projects do have such requirements stated in big letters on their bug trackers front page; these might even include to ask first on the relevant mailing list before reporting a bug. I think its better to tell people in advance that to have to tell them later that their bug report does not meet the checklist. Nothing against a false bugreport as long as it is clear, understandable and reasonable. But weird and incomplete bug reports have the best chance to be ignored and rejected. Does anyone share my point of view the collector overview page should state the requirements explicitely? If yes, is there any interest that I try to formulate some alternative text for the front page (which would need to be polished by some native speaker)? I would definitely appreciate that. P.S. apologies if I am on the wrong list - if so, has anyone pointers about a better place to post this? zope-dev would have been better. Andreas pgp1tQSSHAD7p.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Zope-web maillist - Zope-web@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-web
Re: [ZWeb] Zope Collector policies?
Does anyone share my point of view the collector overview page should state the requirements explicitely? If they must be so demanding, then yes, very much so. Also you raised this just where I'd expect to see it. Thanks, -Simon ___ Zope-web maillist - Zope-web@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-web
Re: [ZWeb] Zope Collector policies?
Hi Andreas, Simon just a short reply: Thank You very much for the feedback, especially the clarifications on the bug report requirements. Andreas: [big snip] zope-dev would have been better. As it seems, the bug report policies are not really written down yet. I understand it might be a better idea to open a discussion on zope-dev first to clarify the policies there. Simon: > > Also you raised this just where I'd expect to see it. > Well, as the issue seem not to be only about formulations, I will first see how the discussion on zope-dev comes out, and then come back here; I hope this is ok for You, too. It seems I caught a little flue, so I will post next to zope-dev after easter, sorry Cheers anyway, Clemens ___ Zope-web maillist - Zope-web@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-web
Re: [ZWeb] Zope Collector policies?
Hi Clemens and Simon: On Apr 12, 2006, at 8:41 AM, Simon Michael wrote: Does anyone share my point of view the collector overview page should state the requirements explicitely? If they must be so demanding, then yes, very much so. Also you raised this just where I'd expect to see it. Yep agreed.. I've not seen these requirements spelled out clearly. So, at the very least, I think it would be a good idea, Clemens, to do so and make them available. :^) That said, what do you and Simon think of these de facto requirements. I'm no developer but I can see that some might find them draconian and some might find them absolutely necessary for scale. Thoughts? Regards, Rob -- Rob Page V: 540 361 1710 Zope Corporation F: 703 995 0412 ___ Zope-web maillist - Zope-web@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-web
Re: [ZWeb] Zope Collector policies?
Well since you ask.. I fear that they sound like the usual style of A. Jung's School of Hard Knocks For Newbies. No offense intended Andreas. Those are valuable goals but we should pursue them in a way that does not drive away even one would-be contributor. I've found myself in that category on many projects, and it's not fun to have your good will squashed instead of channeled constructively. It's the Zope community's loss when that happens. People go where they're treated with respect. I think it's up to the Zope community to make it's tools and communications and parsing of feedback more efficient - not up to the rest of the world to become top-percentile developers before we will allow them to offer a frickin bug report! The clearest up-front communication of current procedures and policy, whatever they are, is absolutely a great low-cost high-impact move and I'm glad Clemens was persistent enough to propose and drive it. -Simon who seems to have to opinions on this.. ___ Zope-web maillist - Zope-web@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-web
Re: [ZWeb] Zope Collector policies?
--On 13. April 2006 00:14:21 -0700 Simon Michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Well since you ask.. I fear that they sound like the usual style of A. Jung's School of Hard Knocks For Newbies. No offense intended Andreas. Other projects are similar. Go to the Mozilla/Firefox bugzilla instance. First they tell you to search if your issue isn't already in the bugtracker. Then you fill out a form where you need to clearly describe your problem and fill out point 1,2,3... to reproduce the problem. So people should use their brain before posting "something"...also newbies can and do post valuable bug reports. We are talking about a certain group of users that has some certain expectations about the bug tracker is and that have no idea *how* report properly. For my own projects I have a similar "bug reporting guideline"...and usually most users are really able to posting something reasonable after pointing them to the guidelines..call it "how to educate users to report bugs"...I think there is nothing offending here.. just-my-2-cents, -aj -- ZOPYX Ltd. & Co. KG - Charlottenstr. 37/1 - 72070 Tübingen - Germany Web: www.zopyx.com - Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Phone +49 - 7071 - 793376 E-Publishing, Python, Zope & Plone development and consulting pgpgxNdMs8e1h.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Zope-web maillist - Zope-web@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-web
Re: [ZWeb] Zope Collector policies?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 13 Apr 2006, at 09:16, Andreas Jung wrote: --On 13. April 2006 00:14:21 -0700 Simon Michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Well since you ask.. I fear that they sound like the usual style of A. Jung's School of Hard Knocks For Newbies. No offense intended Andreas. Other projects are similar. Go to the Mozilla/Firefox bugzilla instance. First they tell you to search if your issue isn't already in the bugtracker. Then you fill out a form where you need to clearly describe your problem and fill out point 1,2,3... to reproduce the problem. So people should use their brain before posting "something"...also newbies can and do post valuable bug reports. We are talking about a certain group of users that has some certain expectations about the bug tracker is and that have no idea *how* report properly. For my own projects I have a similar "bug reporting guideline"...and usually most users are really able to posting something reasonable after pointing them to the guidelines..call it "how to educate users to report bugs"...I think there is nothing offending here.. For scaling I would consider it absolutely necessary to have specific rules. If the collector is some free-for-all where anyone can dump stuff in unstructured ways then it will become completely useless. On the one hand the goal is to be all-inclusive, to shift the burden from the bug reporter to the problem solver. I think that's short- sighted. Please keep in mind that the problem solvers themselves are volunteers. Newbies could be turned away by rules that put more of a burden on them, but at the same time experienced developers can be turned away by being forced to consider any and all posting to the collector equally, be it a reasonable bug report or not. There's two sides to this issue, not just "please don't beat the poor newbies". jens -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (Darwin) iD8DBQFEPhJ9RAx5nvEhZLIRAuYvAKCzaHdObaObrHdyeVGSeqyLZ/oRFwCgtQec qmxbPopM2eZ/N5QS8F8CfXY= =P5ul -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Zope-web maillist - Zope-web@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-web
