On Tue, Jan 01, 2008 at 05:04:06PM +0300, Kirill Smelkov wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 01, 2008 at 02:50:13PM +0100, Ondrej Certik wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > google now for some time allows to sort the issues as we want, so if you go > > to: > > > > http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/list > > > > the first issues are the ones with a milestone set, the rest is sorted > > according to a priority. > > Usually, the time each of us can put into sympy is scattered - so what > > I do is that I > > just open the issues and try to fix some of the top ones. > > > > So the priority should be set according to what is best for sympy. So > > my proposition: > > > > * critical - those that need to be fixed right now (maybe some failing > > tests, etc.) > > * high - all usability issues reported by users, that are quite easy > > to fix, like integrate() method not working > > for some particular integral, or __nonzero__ working, or bad > > cooperation with numpy etc. This is very > > important to get fixed, because if the user reported it, it means it's > > important for them, and > > most of it is quite easy for us to fix > > * normal - all other bugs - either difficult to fix (if we are not > > even sure about the approach), or just enhancements, etc. > > * low - the rest > > Agree.
Also, maybe let's write xfailing tests for reported issues *before* fixing them? This way we will be able to see that some issue is fixed automatically by other change. -- Всего хорошего, Кирилл. http://landau.phys.spbu.ru/~kirr/aiv/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sympy" group. To post to this group, send email to sympy@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sympy?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---