| 1 |
On Sun, Jan 19, 2020 at 2:32 PM Kent Fredric <kentnl@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> Having a discussion at a bar, and you making a commit as a result is |
| 4 |
> one thing, but if I discovered a bug, and then only told you about it |
| 5 |
> at the bar, that would be possibly bad, because there's no guarantee |
| 6 |
> that the bug is communicated sufficient to ensure it gets addressed, |
| 7 |
> and you may go home at the end of the night and entirely forget the bug |
| 8 |
> existed, and people could continue to suffer it, and potentially |
| 9 |
> neglect to report it as well. ( End users are substantially less likely |
| 10 |
> to file bugs, IME ) |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> When I mention bugs to people on IRC, I often follow up with "Would you |
| 13 |
> like me to file a bug?". |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> Often, the answer is "yes". |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> The crux of the matter being bugs that exist, and are communicated |
| 18 |
> outside the core bug tracker, weaken the assurance that it will be seen |
| 19 |
> and fixed, which amounts to a negative thing. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Oh, I absolutely agree with this. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
My point is that right now we have no policy that requires bugs to be |
| 24 |
filed. And hence stuff that happens on github really is no different |
| 25 |
than your case of stuff happening in a bar. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
I can't speak for the QA repo, but don't we have a bot that notices |
| 28 |
open pull requests for the main repo mirror on github which are |
| 29 |
missing bug references to post notices to this effect? When this |
| 30 |
started happening I think a lot of the concerns were reduced. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
I mean, like was already mentioned, if there were a gitlab repo or |
| 33 |
whatever being hosted a lot of this might become moot. We're just not |
| 34 |
there yet. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
I'm not sure if the Foundation has considered approaching gitlab.com |
| 37 |
about hosting. Granted, that isn't their FOSS product, but I suspect |
| 38 |
the repos could be exported and imported into the FOSS product as a |
| 39 |
contingency. I have it on good authority from somebody who works |
| 40 |
there that their proprietary hosted product is identical to the FOSS |
| 41 |
one aside from the proprietary modules, so as long as you avoid the |
| 42 |
latter it should be the same thing. If they're willing to donate or |
| 43 |
offer cheaper hosting it might give us the benefits of the FOSS |
| 44 |
repository while avoiding the hassles of hosting Ruby or whatever it |
| 45 |
is written in. |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
-- |
| 48 |
Rich |
Archives