Can everybody change the status of an issue? I would like to change 12521 from *Resolved (Fix Reviewed by the Monkey**)* *to* Resolved (Fix To Include) Or how does reviewing work? Nicolai
thatâs usually done by the integrators, but nothing prevents you to do it :) On 29 Dec 2013, at 21:47, Nicolai Hess <nicolaihess@web.de> wrote:
Can everybody change the status of an issue?
I would like to change 12521 from Resolved (Fix Reviewed by the Monkey) to Resolved (Fix To Include)
Or how does reviewing work?
Nicolai
On 29 Dec 2013, at 23:34, btc@openinworld.com wrote:
Esteban Lorenzano wrote:
thatâs usually done by the integrators, but nothing prevents you to do it :)
I thought wider community involvement was encouraged for anyone to provide the peer review to move items to status Resolved Fix To Include with the integrators then moving it to status Resolved Fix Included (and then usually straight to Closed status)
Yes, but for a real working system we would need a voting scheme⦠right now it matters not much as everything is manual, but of it would be automatic, it would be nice to have something like âtwo people who are commuters say itâs goo then it is good to be integrated automaticallyâ.] Right now the idea is that people can set the âfix to includeâ if they are 150% sure that is is a good change. Itâs better to just add a note to the âfix review neededâ so then someone else will say âhe thinks itâs good, I double checked, so itâs goodâ. So, in short: we need a better system, but for now it kind of works. Marcus
Since we can inject javascript in fogbugz, we should give a try to add a voting system :P Ben On 30 Dec 2013, at 12:12, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr> wrote:
On 29 Dec 2013, at 23:34, btc@openinworld.com wrote:
Esteban Lorenzano wrote:
thatâs usually done by the integrators, but nothing prevents you to do it :)
I thought wider community involvement was encouraged for anyone to provide the peer review to move items to status Resolved Fix To Include with the integrators then moving it to status Resolved Fix Included (and then usually straight to Closed status)
Yes, but for a real working system we would need a voting schemeâ¦
right now it matters not much as everything is manual, but of it would be automatic, it would be nice to have something like âtwo people who are commuters say itâs goo then it is good to be integrated automaticallyâ.]
Right now the idea is that people can set the âfix to includeâ if they are 150% sure that is is a good change. Itâs better to just add a note to the âfix review neededâ so then someone else will say âhe thinks itâs good, I double checked, so itâs goodâ.
So, in short: we need a better system, but for now it kind of works.
Marcus
please donât. Democracy does not make sense. Do you think that linus is taking into account democracy vote when fixing core of linux? Stef
Since we can inject javascript in fogbugz, we should give a try to add a voting system :P
Ben
On 30 Dec 2013, at 12:12, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr> wrote:
On 29 Dec 2013, at 23:34, btc@openinworld.com wrote:
Esteban Lorenzano wrote:
thatâs usually done by the integrators, but nothing prevents you to do it :)
I thought wider community involvement was encouraged for anyone to provide the peer review to move items to status Resolved Fix To Include with the integrators then moving it to status Resolved Fix Included (and then usually straight to Closed status)
Yes, but for a real working system we would need a voting schemeâ¦
right now it matters not much as everything is manual, but of it would be automatic, it would be nice to have something like âtwo people who are commuters say itâs goo then it is good to be integrated automaticallyâ.]
Right now the idea is that people can set the âfix to includeâ if they are 150% sure that is is a good change. Itâs better to just add a note to the âfix review neededâ so then someone else will say âhe thinks itâs good, I double checked, so itâs goodâ.
So, in short: we need a better system, but for now it kind of works.
Marcus
If Linus Torvald is your model, then I quit Pharo :P Ben On 30 Dec 2013, at 17:12, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> wrote:
please donât. Democracy does not make sense. Do you think that linus is taking into account democracy vote when fixing core of linux?
Stef
Since we can inject javascript in fogbugz, we should give a try to add a voting system :P
Ben
On 30 Dec 2013, at 12:12, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr> wrote:
On 29 Dec 2013, at 23:34, btc@openinworld.com wrote:
Esteban Lorenzano wrote:
thatâs usually done by the integrators, but nothing prevents you to do it :)
I thought wider community involvement was encouraged for anyone to provide the peer review to move items to status Resolved Fix To Include with the integrators then moving it to status Resolved Fix Included (and then usually straight to Closed status)
Yes, but for a real working system we would need a voting schemeâ¦
right now it matters not much as everything is manual, but of it would be automatic, it would be nice to have something like âtwo people who are commuters say itâs goo then it is good to be integrated automaticallyâ.]
Right now the idea is that people can set the âfix to includeâ if they are 150% sure that is is a good change. Itâs better to just add a note to the âfix review neededâ so then someone else will say âhe thinks itâs good, I double checked, so itâs goodâ.
So, in short: we need a better system, but for now it kind of works.
Marcus
+1 Am 30.12.2013 um 17:30 schrieb Benjamin <benjamin.vanryseghem.pharo@gmail.com>:
If Linus Torvald is your model, then I quit Pharo :P
Ben
On 30 Dec 2013, at 17:12, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> wrote:
please donât. Democracy does not make sense. Do you think that linus is taking into account democracy vote when fixing core of linux?
Stef
Since we can inject javascript in fogbugz, we should give a try to add a voting system :P
Ben
On 30 Dec 2013, at 12:12, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr> wrote:
On 29 Dec 2013, at 23:34, btc@openinworld.com wrote:
Esteban Lorenzano wrote:
thatâs usually done by the integrators, but nothing prevents you to do it :)
I thought wider community involvement was encouraged for anyone to provide the peer review to move items to status Resolved Fix To Include with the integrators then moving it to status Resolved Fix Included (and then usually straight to Closed status)
Yes, but for a real working system we would need a voting schemeâ¦
right now it matters not much as everything is manual, but of it would be automatic, it would be nice to have something like âtwo people who are commuters say itâs goo then it is good to be integrated automaticallyâ.]
Right now the idea is that people can set the âfix to includeâ if they are 150% sure that is is a good change. Itâs better to just add a note to the âfix review neededâ so then someone else will say âhe thinks itâs good, I double checked, so itâs goodâ.
So, in short: we need a better system, but for now it kind of works.
Marcus
Am 30.12.2013 um 19:41 schrieb Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr>:
If Linus Torvald is your model, then I quit Pharo :P
I will tell you stories where democracy in open-source does not work in feb.
Between Linus Torvalds and a democrazy variant that leads only to stagnation is plenty of room for a model that fits best. Norbert
On 31 Dec 2013, at 11:10, Norbert Hartl <norbert@hartl.name> wrote:
Am 30.12.2013 um 19:41 schrieb Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr>:
If Linus Torvald is your model, then I quit Pharo :P
I will tell you stories where democracy in open-source does not work in feb.
Between Linus Torvalds and a democrazy variant that leads only to stagnation is plenty of room for a model that fits best.
the problem with linux is not the ruling model linux has, is Linus Torvalds attitude: He completely forgot about the âbenevolentâ word in âbenevolent dictatorshipâ :) Esteban
Norbert
On 31 Dec 2013, at 11:10, Norbert Hartl <norbert@hartl.name> wrote:
Am 30.12.2013 um 19:41 schrieb Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr>:
If Linus Torvald is your model, then I quit Pharo :P
I will tell you stories where democracy in open-source does not work in feb.
Between Linus Torvalds and a democrazy variant that leads only to stagnation is plenty of room for a model that fits best.
exactly. Marcus
On 30 Dec 2013, at 17:13, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> wrote:
please donât. Democracy does not make sense. Do you think that linus is taking into account democracy vote when fixing core of linux?
No, the idea is *not* democracy⦠because itâs not that lots of e.g. newbies like a change that it should be done ;-) What I want is a way so that people can easily mark that they like it. The rule would be that e.g. one needs 2 yes votes in total, but one needs to be from a core committer (or even integrator). Marcus
"If Linus Torvald is your model, then I quit Pharo :P Ben" And I am coming with you , running :D "please donât. Democracy does not make sense. Do you think that linus is taking into account democracy vote when fixing core of linux? Stef" I would say that lack of Democracy makes no sense for a product that aims to please / make people happy. Because if you take pharo towards a direction people do not like, then people will leave. They wont report a bug, they wont post in the mailing list complaining about the things that truly annoy them, they wont make a blog post, they may not even think much about it. One second they are here, the next one, they are gone , for good. Because who want to use a product that does not care about his/her needs, I know I don't. I think a voting system is a great idea to really get the heart and beat of your community. Also you may think that every random user will want to vote on an issue but you are wrong , people are way more likely to vote on things they know because its things they deeply care about , this is why democracy has been the most successful system in the only city that it ever existed , ancient Athens. When a person votes on an issue he votes because he cares, he has an interest for it, its something that is not new to him, its something that somehow deeply affects him. It does not mean that everyone will vote for everything. Why ? because everyone does not care about everything. I dont care how VM is designed, so I would not care to vote on VM issues, but GUIs is my thing as are Graphic libraries and yes I would like to have a saying on it. I have already posted on this list about the benefits of PIP in Python, how things are modified and added to python with a consensus from the community or at least the community is aware of what is going on. Python really cares about its code base, and they enjoy the fruits of this appreciation. I agree however that integration should be a product of discussion and not just based on voting. Again this is why python uses PIP which sets out the issues and pros and cons. In Ancient Athens there was a deep discussion before anything was set to a vote. Democracy and discussion are two things that go hand in hand, so you need way more than just a voting system to have a Democracy. Fortunately Fogbuz is already equipped with that.
participants (8)
-
Benjamin -
btc＠openinworld.com -
Esteban Lorenzano -
kilon alios -
Marcus Denker -
Nicolai Hess -
Norbert Hartl -
Stéphane Ducasse