I'm a little puzzled here: this whole discussion is because new owners want to have the bug actually assigned to them, instead of just commenting, "I'm working on this" in the bug?
Let's look at the github model -- there's no assignment at all. I just file a bug, maybe make some comments on it to say I'm working on it, and some time later I submit a pull request referencing the bug and saying, "I fixed it". That seems to work fine for collaboration, and offers no roadblocks. Maybe we should be turning off bugzilla features instead of trying to 'fix' them. The whole 'file a bug in bugzilla' process is already far too complicated with a dozen fields which are either irrelevant or just confusing to newcomers. Can we just hide all this cruft (including the 'assigned to' field) for most users? --scott On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 11:51 AM, Isarra Yos <zhoris...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 07/11/13 16:28, Quim Gil wrote: > >> The issue is the extra step for newcomers vs the risk of many extra >> steps for a few etablished contributors if someone decides to abuse the >> feature, as it happened in the past. And my point is that I personally >> don't believe that such barrier is diminishing the volume of actual >> contributions we receive. >> >> In order to get somewhere with this discussion, it would be useful to >> know the current practice of other free software projects, using >> Bugzilla or not. As a newcomer, can I assign bugs to myself in GNOME, >> KDE, Ubuntu, Debian... etc? >> > > Would that be useful, though? Generally what other free software projects > do is what works for them, and it won't necessarily work for us. It is also > most especially not necessarily good practice when it comes to actually > attracting and keeping new folks, simply due to the nature of what free > software often entails - somewhere along the line, there is usually a lack > of resources, and it is newcomers who suffer the most. > > As much as projects would like, and for that matter, need, new folks, they > only have so much time to devote to it and especially when volunteers make > up a bulk of the community people wind up spending most time on other > things. Bugzilla lacks certain key features that would make it feasible to > open up from the start, and my guess would be it has something to do with > similar - it was simply not a priority, so it never happened. > > For a rather extreme example, there was another project, some OS thing, > that a friend of mine wanted to contribute to awhile back, but he found > that they had disabled account creation entirely due to lack of resources > to combat spam, requiring instead that you find them on IRC or some such > and contact them that way for an account. In no way is this good practice, > and has very much harmed them as well, and yet it was probably the best > thing they could do with what they had. > > Just please be careful when looking at what other people do, here. Why > they did something can be far more important than what they actually did. > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikitech-l mailing list > Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l > -- (http://cscott.net) _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
