On 09/24/2013 07:17 PM, Jonathan Kamens wrote:
As Michael Schwendt has pointed out, NEW implies neither that the bug
hasn't been looked at nor that there has been no activity on it.
Russ Herrold is also correct: if bugs are not being looked at, then
that's not the fault of the bug-tracking system, it's the fault of the
people who are supposed to be looking at the bugs.
Drawing conclusions from a single package is rigging the game, since
what we're discussing is that some packages are maintained better than
others.
Looking at F18 is rigging the game, because a package maintainer may
have (reasonably) stopped looking at F18 bugs when F19 came out if
s/he knows that F19 has a new version which fixes significant bugs.
Having said all that, let's assume, for the sake of argument, that NEW
bugs haven't been looked at or responded to, and try to answer the
question of what percentage of Fedora bugs aren't being looked at or
responded to in a reasonable amount of time. My methodology is to look
at the total of all Fedora bugs filed between one and two months ago
(to limit the scope of the problem -- otherwise you're just dealing
with too many bugs) and then to look at how many bugs within that same
time period are in state NEW.
There are 2,129 NEW Fedora bugs and 5,199 total Fedora bugs filed
between 2013-07-24 and 2013-08-24. That's only 40% of the total number
of bugs, which disproves assertion that the majority of bugs aren't
being dealt with. If we go back a month earlier, from 2013-06-24 to
2013-07-24, there are 1,715 NEW bugs out of 3,932 total bugs, i.e.,
43%. Still not the majority. A month earlier than that, 1,407 out of
3,804 = 36%. Still not the majority.
I entirely agree with you that it would be better if those percentages
were lower. But driving those numbers is not the end goal. The end
goal is to improve the quality of Fedora as much as we can with the
resources we have, and I (and many others, clearly) don't believe that
no longer tracking Fedora bugs in RHBZ will accomplish that.
Working directly with upstream might improve it ( we ofcourse dont know
until we actually try that ) since it will cut out the middle man ( the
packager ) or give the upstream maintainer ( if he's the middle man )
more time to work on the bug discuss and pass it's patch through
upstream ( which needs to be done in most cases anyway ).
JBG
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test