Ed,
Comments below.
On 12/07/2013 8:18 PM, Ed Willink
wrote:
Hi
That's exactly what I mean by 'less prejudiced'.
Prejudice is a stronger word than bias.
The project committers can always produce a long list of reasons
for WONTFIX, often including time/money.
Indeed they can. They can even behave arbitrarily counter to all
reason...
The users can produce a long list of WIBNIFs.
Indeed they can and do.
If an independent view considers the benefits are genuine and
outweigh the problems,
In a completely unbiased and unprejudiced way...
then
it may be that once time/money is available a way should be found.
That's often the key point, as Doug mentions in a subsequent note on
this thread: the resource for addressing the reported issues.
Neither changing how bugzilla is monitored, how bugs are resolved,
nor even a fancy new issue tracking gizmo are going to help produce
resource for addressing a single reported issue. The time used on
these is likely better spent directly on addressing reported issues.
Perhaps an overruled WONTFIX could attract 'funding' from a
foundation let's-not-suck fund.
I'm sorry, but overruling my handling of the issues in the tracking
system for my projects seems highly counter to the spirit of open
source. And I can well imagine the extent to which the demand for
funds from a let's-not-suck fund will always exceed the bounds of
the fund.
Ultimately if there is something that the user's resonably want, I
feel that we should be looking for a way to provide it.
"Reasonable" is certainly one of the key criteria, but of course
everyone feels what they want is reasonable, and who's to say who's
unbiased or unprejudiced and therefore ought to judge what's
reasonably reasonable, and who isn't?
I think Doug's other point of how best to get people actually
involved in the projects to address the lack-of-resource problem is
a more important focal point.
Ask yourself, as a committer with a significant amount of
experience working on your own project (i.e., you know a lot about
how to work with Eclipse's infrastructure), if you wanted to work on
some other Eclipse project Foo to provide a patch for a problem, how
much work is it to do the following:
- Extract that project's source repos; Does Foo have many repos?
Goodness forbid does it use SVN? If it uses git, does it also
use gerrit so you can commit changes for review?
- Ensure that you have the appropriate VM; Does Foo need Java
1.4, 1.5., 1.6 or 1.7 to be available? Do they have project
specific settings to help?
- Install the right tools in the IDE; Does Foo rely on build and
generator tools that you'll need to produce runnable code? Does
Foo rely on tools to work with its specialized artifacts?
- Provision a target platform with the right things needed by
Foo just to compile and run the tests. Are those dependencies
documented? Are there 30 such dependencies? Which p2 repos do
those dependencies come from? Which versions of the
dependencies are needed by which branches of Foo?
- Provision a workspace with the necessary projects; Are there
300 hundred of them? Are they logically grouped into working
sets. Do you have you have to figure that out yourself?
How many of these issues are well addressed by team project sets?
Just the last bullet I think. Also, consider this: how many of you
have tried one of those for project Foo, and ended up with a sea of
errors that can and will cost you hours to address? This is one of
the key barriers to entry, because those hours spent on setup time
will drive anyone but the most resilient to despair and saps the
very lifeblood from those we wish to tap for involvement and
contribution.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 12/07/2013 18:57, Ed Merks wrote:
Igor,
I think it's even stronger than that. In the end, WONTFIX
shouldn't mean "I don't have time or I don't feel like it" but
rather "it's working as designed and changing it isn't what I
believe is appropriate". As such, even if someone provided a
"fix," that's not what's desired. Committers have the right
and in fact an obligation to maintain design integrity;
sometimes that annoys people. In any case, we're not
obligated to spend every waking moment of every day to fix every
reported problem, though it sometimes feels that way....
Regards,
Ed
On 12/07/2013 7:26 PM, Igor Fedorenko wrote:
How is this going to help? In most/all
cases bugs are not fixed because
nobody comes forward with quality fixes. Weather somebody says
"it needs
to be fixed" does not matter unless his/her words are backed
up by the
code.
--
Regards,
Igor
On 2013-07-12 11:50 PM, Ed Willink wrote:
Hi
Get a committer from a related but independent project to
review the
Bugzilla discussion to form a less prejudiced on view on
whether the
WONTFIX is justified.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 12/07/2013 17:25, Doug Schaefer wrote:
It is. And I'm sure there are hate
sites for every tool people use.
Eclipse isn't unique that way.
My point is that user experience is so important to our
success, we
need to be sensitive to the issues our users are facing.
There are a
lot of such issues marked WONTFIX, and CDT is as guilty of
that as
anyone. I'm just wondering how we fix it.
Doug.
_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2013.0.3349 / Virus Database: 3204/6486 - Release Date:
07/12/13
_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
|
