[Issue Tracker] input of submitters/bug fixers needed
Hello, The issue tracker is again at over 500 entries: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/filters/33/All-by-project Please, if you submitted a bug in the past, check it's status! -> Maybe someone asked you a trivial question that *you* can answer in 10 seconds, but if you don't, the issue can not be moved forward? -> Maybe you fixed an issue but there was some problem ("You said you uploaded a Slice but I can't find it!". *you* can fix this in 20 seconds, whereas for everyone else this means re-creating your work from scratch. -> Maybe your bug that you reported ages ago is already fixed? You can check this very very quickly, whereas for everyone else this means quite some effort of understanding, re-creating and even then not being sure if it's really fixed. -> Maybe you added an Issue which is more your private project that nobody else will work on, anyway. Maybe you can think about not having an issue for that? -> Maybe you reported some real triviality. Why not fix it yourself? Does it really need someone else to submit a Slice? Marcus
Thank you for taking care of this, Marcus! While we're on the subject, there have been some issues which were not resolved that were closed due to e.g. inactivity. I totally understand the need to keep the bug tracker to a manageable size, but I feel that something is lost when we do this. For example, a few times I've encountered a bug, felt like I'd seen it before, checked the issue tracker and didn't see it even though I was pretty sure I had already reported it, only to find out after a bit of head-scratching that I had reported it, it still existed, but had been closed. I find it very confusing. Thinking about how to have it all, I thought that we should have a status especially for these cases, so that they still exist, but can be easily filtered out; something like "Stale". Actually, then we can probably be even more agressive tagging them and getting them out of the way because they will not disappear. My feeling is that this is still an "Active" status, because there are definitely some long-standing bugs that we continuously gather info about and there should be an obvious place to gather those bits. On the other hand, even if it was a "Resolved" status, at least I'd know right where to look if I didn't see my issue and could have a filter to easily revive an inactive issue that was found to still be a problem. What do you think? Thanks. ----- Cheers, Sean -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Issue-Tracker-input-of-submitters-bug-fixers-needed-tp... Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
On Sep 26, 2013, at 2:34 PM, "Sean P. DeNigris" <sean@clipperadams.com> wrote:
Thank you for taking care of this, Marcus!
While we're on the subject, there have been some issues which were not resolved that were closed due to e.g. inactivity. I totally understand the need to keep the bug tracker to a manageable size, but I feel that something is lost when we do this. For example, a few times I've encountered a bug, felt like I'd seen it before, checked the issue tracker and didn't see it even though I was pretty sure I had already reported it, only to find out after a bit of head-scratching that I had reported it, it still existed, but had been closed. I find it very confusing.
Thinking about how to have it all, I thought that we should have a status especially for these cases, so that they still exist, but can be easily filtered out; something like "Stale". Actually, then we can probably be even more agressive tagging them and getting them out of the way because they will not disappear. My feeling is that this is still an "Active" status, because there are definitely some long-standing bugs that we continuously gather info about and there should be an obvious place to gather those bits. On the other hand, even if it was a "Resolved" status, at least I'd know right where to look if I didn't see my issue and could have a filter to easily revive an inactive issue that was found to still be a problem.
What do you think?
The problem is that if we have over 500 entries, people just give up. They say "what use is it to fix 1, there are just too many". And just how important is an issue that had no activity for 3 years? Marcus
Marcus Denker-4 wrote
The problem is that if we have over 500 entries, people just give up. They say "what use is it to fix 1, there are just too many".
Okay, so I think a "Resolved" status like "Stale" would be a good compromise. Then we can close the issue, but it will be tagged as to the reason, so in my example I can have a filter for closed issues tagged Stale, and easily reopen them if necessary. The problem is that now I have to wade through hundreds of closed issues I worked on to find the ones that were closed due to inactivity - not fun. ----- Cheers, Sean -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Issue-Tracker-input-of-submitters-bug-fixers-needed-tp... Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
On 2013-09-26, at 10:23, "Sean P. DeNigris" <sean@clipperadams.com> wrote:
Marcus Denker-4 wrote
The problem is that if we have over 500 entries, people just give up. They say "what use is it to fix 1, there are just too many".
Okay, so I think a "Resolved" status like "Stale" would be a good compromise. Then we can close the issue, but it will be tagged as to the reason, so in my example I can have a filter for closed issues tagged Stale, and easily reopen them if necessary. The problem is that now I have to wade through hundreds of closed issues I worked on to find the ones that were closed due to inactivity - not fun.
we have a couple of statuses that come close to that: Resolved Postponed Resolved Won't Fix If you want we can decide upon Postponed and then close them. Could you check that this is in sync with the status description? https://pharo.fogbugz.com/default.asp?W65
On Sep 26, 2013, at 3:57 PM, Camillo Bruni <camillobruni@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2013-09-26, at 10:23, "Sean P. DeNigris" <sean@clipperadams.com> wrote:
Marcus Denker-4 wrote
The problem is that if we have over 500 entries, people just give up. They say "what use is it to fix 1, there are just too many".
Okay, so I think a "Resolved" status like "Stale" would be a good compromise. Then we can close the issue, but it will be tagged as to the reason, so in my example I can have a filter for closed issues tagged Stale, and easily reopen them if necessary. The problem is that now I have to wade through hundreds of closed issues I worked on to find the ones that were closed due to inactivity - not fun.
we have a couple of statuses that come close to that: Resolved Postponed
indeed Postponed should be close to stale and I understand Sean concerns.
Resolved Won't Fix
If you want we can decide upon Postponed and then close them. Could you check that this is in sync with the status description?
I agree, closing bugs , or deleting them, on the grounds that none has comment on them for a very long time is a very bad idea. Pharo has a small crowd of users and I seriously doubt they care much of the bug report process. That does not make a bug any less important though. In the end of the day, it would depend upon on a dev that seriously needs that bug fixed and does it himself. But then the questions arises how many people that find themselves against a bug don't choose curtain number 2 and go around the bug instead of fixing it , since it gets the job done faster. Blender used to have close to 500 bugs ( now it has around 300 ), and it has around 30 monthly commiters with at least 600 commits per month ( https://www.ohloh.net/p/blender <https://www.ohloh.net/p/blender> ). So its not as bad as it seems. About non important bugs, very easy to fix bugs and already solved bugs, I doubt that there are as many as you wish to think :) Bugs are rarely a walk in the park , hence why bug fixing is not a favorite habit :D -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Issue-Tracker-input-of-submitters-bug-fixers-needed-tp... Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
we have a couple of statuses that come close to that:Â
Resolved Postponed
indeed Postponed should be close to stale and I understand Sean concerns. Yes, that sounds like it could work. If we standardize on using Postponed when closing issues where it's not clear if it's actually resolved, that would be a definite improvement. - s ----- Cheers, Sean -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Issue-Tracker-input-of-submitters-bug-fixers-needed-tp... Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Agreed. stef On Sep 28, 2013, at 5:39 AM, Sean P. DeNigris <sean@clipperadams.com> wrote:
we have a couple of statuses that come close to that:
Resolved Postponed
indeed Postponed should be close to stale and I understand Sean concerns.
Yes, that sounds like it could work. If we standardize on using Postponed when closing issues where it's not clear if it's actually resolved, that would be a definite improvement.
- s Cheers, Sean
View this message in context: Re: [Issue Tracker] input of submitters/bug fixers needed Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
participants (5)
-
Camillo Bruni -
kilon -
Marcus Denker -
Sean P. DeNigris -
Stéphane Ducasse