On Wed, 16 May 2012 14:31:50 +0200, Guido Berhoerster wrote:
On 16.05.2012 05:04, Jim Henderson wrote:
1. There should be some sort of "screening" that takes place before a bug is accepted - to ensure that the devs aren't seeing multiple copies of the same bugs. I think it's fair to say that those who write code would far rather *write code* than try to sort through duplicate bug entries. While it's likely there still would be dupes with a screening process, the incidence should be reduced.
By default get assigned to the bnc-screening team who then assign to the package maintainer(s), however without any evaluation. Who are these people actually? It looks to me like Chinese SUSE/Novell staff. That would be a place to expand upon if we could find voluteers subscribing to the screening list and trying to do some further work such as classifying, possibly triaging and identifying duplicates before assigning to the actual maintainers. That doesn't require much technical skills the hard part is luring new people into contributing first.
I think this probably comes back to providing some entry-level training those who want to help but aren't sure what's involved. Bugzilla - for all its good points - does present a pretty intimidating interface to the uninitiated. Maybe we could organize a live online-session every couple of months (just throwing ideas out here) for those who want to help with bug squashing but aren't sure how they can. A live Q&A often times will have a less intimidating feel, because if discussion is encouraged by the moderator/coordinator, a good discussion can occur that gets people excited about helping out. I think if we can get users to feel some sense of ownership - that openSUSE is /their/ distribution, that will help feed the process. / Especially/ if they can see the results of their contributions in a real and tangible way.
2. There needs to be more of a "human" reply, especially on older bugs, that are being addressed. Looking at the current Bugzilla stats, I see that (for example) 12.1 has 183 bugs in a "NEEDINFO" state - there needs to be some sort of consistent follow-up to ensure that the info needed to fix the issues is provided, and if it isn't and the information can't be obtained (because the issue cannot be duped, those looking at it don't have the necessary hardware, etc), then the bug needs to be closed.
3. For older bugs, (such as on 10.3-11.3, which there are still open bugs on), a determination needs to be made as to whether the current supported releases have those issues, and if they do, the bugs need to be updated. If they don't, then the bugs need to be flagged in an appropriate way.
I think it would be appropriate to automaitically send a reminder to those bugs against unsupported releases in NEEDINFO state asking people to triage against a supported version of oS and then to close those not receiving any response in a couple of weeks. That's better than simply WONTFIX'ing in case there are still people that care about them. In fact that is what I already do with bugs against my packages.
That's a very good idea (I assume you mean "asking people to test" rather than "triage"). :) Jim -- Jim Henderson Please keep on-topic replies on the list so everyone benefits -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org