Re: [opensuse-gnome] GNOME main menu bugs
Votes make it easier to prioritize our fixing. We have thousands of bugs, and not everyone might care as much about these bugs as you do. It's that simple.
Hello, I'm sorry to repeat myself for the n-th time, but I don't understand why the assignee of a bug doesn't answer to the bug report for example, independently by votes, when it's a lot of time some of those bugs are reported. At this point, marking those bugs as WONTFIX seems a solution too, at least closer to what's actually happening. The list of bugs at the beginning of this thread was written by me at least twice. I saw the bugs assigned for ages, without even a comment from the assignee, and of course without fixes. In the IRC channel I received answers like "we are waiting for the next version, then we will see if the bug is still there", but a bug usually doesn't fix by itself. The last comment I heard about these issues was from jpr, who said "I asked sreeves to revise them". From that time, nothing. I can vote for bugs, but it is pretty clear that a bug report regarding a memory leak of about 100 MB, a loading time of about a minute for an applet or a CPU usage of 100% are more urgent than, for example, resizing the menu buttons. Being the main-menu one of the applets characterising GNOME in openSUSE, and being loaded by default, it's basic common sense to try to have it without these issues, or at least to give an answer of what plans are in the box for it. Anyway, thanks for the interest in the thread I opened. We'll see what comes out with openSUSE 11.0. With kind regards, Alberto -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+help@opensuse.org
On Tue, 2008-04-01 at 14:06 +0200, Alberto Passalacqua wrote:
Votes make it easier to prioritize our fixing. We have thousands of bugs, and not everyone might care as much about these bugs as you do. It's that simple.
Hello,
<snip>
The list of bugs at the beginning of this thread was written by me at least twice. I saw the bugs assigned for ages, without even a comment from the assignee, and of course without fixes. In the IRC channel I received answers like "we are waiting for the next version, then we will see if the bug is still there", but a bug usually doesn't fix by itself.
If you are going to use examples from IRC, wouldn't it be fair to actually quote a bit more from the actual conversation? What I told you on IRC was that there was a lot of patches produced during the g-m-m bugweek and we were waiting for them find their way into Factory.
With kind regards, Alberto
Cheers, Magnus -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+help@opensuse.org
If you are going to use examples from IRC, wouldn't it be fair to actually quote a bit more from the actual conversation? What I told you on IRC was that there was a lot of patches produced during the g-m-m bugweek and we were waiting for them find their way into Factory. If you are going to use examples from IRC, wouldn't it be fair to actually quote a bit more from the actual conversation? What I told you on IRC was that there was a lot of patches produced during the g-m-m bugweek and we were waiting for them find their way into Factory.
If you ask users to report bugs on bugzilla, request enhancement on bugzilla and vote for bugs to prioritize them on bugzilla, at least I would expect to find a "Fixed" label for the bug, if a patch is submitted. It's not fun to spend time reporting bugs or asking about them, so a timely update of bugzilla, would be helpful. Moreover, all the bug reports are against openSUSE 10.3, so committing a patch to factory doesn't actually solve the problem. Finally, main-menu bug week was some time ago, and those reports are still unchanged. With kind regards, Alberto -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+help@opensuse.org
On Tue, 2008-04-01 at 14:06 +0200, Alberto Passalacqua wrote:
I'm sorry to repeat myself for the n-th time, but I don't understand why the assignee of a bug doesn't answer to the bug report for example, independently by votes, when it's a lot of time some of those bugs are reported. At this point, marking those bugs as WONTFIX seems a solution too, at least closer to what's actually happening.
The list of bugs at the beginning of this thread was written by me at least twice. I saw the bugs assigned for ages, without even a comment from the assignee, and of course without fixes. In the IRC channel I received answers like "we are waiting for the next version, then we will see if the bug is still there", but a bug usually doesn't fix by itself.
AFAIK the main-menu received a bunch of fixing and patches from Federico and others, but they were not aimed at closing specific bugs, but rather general tasks such as "reducing leaks" and "improving performance". I've sat in on at least one session of main-menu code review myself. What seems to be the problem here is communication. I suspect that Scott Reeves thinks these bugs might have been fixed by the review and patches, but that he's not entirely sure, and hasn't had time to verify it yet. Instead of closing the bugs as "probably fixed", he leaves them open so that they're not lost in case the bugs are still there. This is good practice, but maybe it could have been communicated better.
The last comment I heard about these issues was from jpr, who said "I asked sreeves to revise them". From that time, nothing.
Have you tried contacting Scott directly? That seems like the most logical course of action.
I can vote for bugs, but it is pretty clear that a bug report regarding a memory leak of about 100 MB, a loading time of about a minute for an applet or a CPU usage of 100% are more urgent than, for example, resizing the menu buttons.
Being the main-menu one of the applets characterising GNOME in openSUSE, and being loaded by default, it's basic common sense to try to have it without these issues, or at least to give an answer of what plans are in the box for it.
Yes. Have you verified that the bugs are still there? If not, could you do that and add comments to the bugs saying "still a problem in Alpha 3" or whatever? Magnus does that, and I know it's helpful when it comes to my own bugs. Then I can know what to focus my attention on without spending a lot of time investigating each one. I guess you should make sure that the hackweek patches Magnus mentioned are in before you test. Sorry for not looking deeper into your complaint before posting my initial reply. I still think bug voting is a good idea :) -- Hans Petter -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+help@opensuse.org
AFAIK the main-menu received a bunch of fixing and patches from Federico and others, but they were not aimed at closing specific bugs, but rather general tasks such as "reducing leaks" and "improving performance". I've sat in on at least one session of main-menu code review myself.
What seems to be the problem here is communication. I suspect that Scott Reeves thinks these bugs might have been fixed by the review and patches, but that he's not entirely sure, and hasn't had time to verify it yet. Instead of closing the bugs as "probably fixed", he leaves them open so that they're not lost in case the bugs are still there. This is good practise, but maybe it could have been communicated better.
Without a doubt. A one-line message is more than enough, if it contains an answer.
Have you tried contacting Scott directly? That seems like the most logical course of action.
Of course not. We are not supposed to do that. The communication about bugs should be on bugzilla anyway, and discussion on ML.
Yes. Have you verified that the bugs are still there? If not, could you do that and add comments to the bugs saying "still a problem in Alpha 3" or whatever? Magnus does that, and I know it's helpful when it comes to my own bugs. Then I can know what to focus my attention on without spending a lot of time investigating each one.
I can't verify in alpha 3 right now because I removed, having only a laptop to experiment with. I will surely give them a look in beta testing though. In the meanwhile, I can point you to what I consider the worst issues: * The memory leak: it's _slow_, not fast as it happened in 10.1. I had it after various suspend/resume cycles. * The load speed issue with high cpu usage. I notice it at every login on 10.3. Of course, if they're fixed in factory, that's better.
I guess you should make sure that the hackweek patches Magnus mentioned are in before you test.
Sorry for not looking deeper into your complaint before posting my initial reply.
No prob! :) Thanks for the interest, Alberto -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+help@opensuse.org
On Tue, 2008-04-01 at 21:29 +0200, Alberto Passalacqua wrote:
Have you tried contacting Scott directly? That seems like the most logical course of action.
Of course not. We are not supposed to do that. The communication about bugs should be on bugzilla anyway, and discussion on ML.
I agree that details-heavy, technical communication should happen in public, logged forums, but I find that misunderstandings can be cleared up more quickly in 1-to-1 conversations. Sometimes all it takes is a little poking :)
In the meanwhile, I can point you to what I consider the worst issues:
* The memory leak: it's _slow_, not fast as it happened in 10.1. I had it after various suspend/resume cycles. * The load speed issue with high cpu usage. I notice it at every login on 10.3.
I commented on the bug with the first issue. For the second issue, does it help if you move away ~/.recently-used.xbel ? -- Hans Petter -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+help@opensuse.org
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 2:49 PM, in message <1207082982.3305.54.camel@kzerza.site>, Hans Petter Jansson <hpj@novell.com> wrote: On Tue, 2008-04-01 at 21:29 +0200, Alberto Passalacqua wrote: The communication about bugs should be on bugzilla anyway, and discussion on ML.
I agree that details-heavy, technical communication should happen in public, logged forums, but I find that misunderstandings can be cleared up more quickly in 1-to-1 conversations. Sometimes all it takes is a little poking :)
Looking through the list in the original mail http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-gnome/2008-03/msg00070.html I know that several of those are being actively worked on so you should see some results soon. As far as the lack of communication in the bugs directly assigned to me I apologize for that. I will do a better job of pumping out progress updates on them rather than waiting for final large wrap ups. And I personally have no problem with a quick status ping on important bugs. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+help@opensuse.org
participants (4)
-
Alberto Passalacqua -
Hans Petter Jansson -
Magnus Boman -
Scott Reeves