| 1 |
Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 2 |
> >> As i said earlier, problem begins when we NEED to stabilize |
| 3 |
> >> something to prevent breakages and arch teams are slow. |
| 4 |
> > |
| 5 |
> > Isn't that simply a matter of assigning and respecting priority on |
| 6 |
> > bugs properly? |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> Are you suggesting that we should forbid people from working on |
| 9 |
> lower-priority bugs anytime a higher-priority bug exists? |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
No, of course not forbid. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
I admit it's naïve but I can't believe that it would be neccessary. |
| 14 |
I expect anyone with the slightest sense of responsibility to solve |
| 15 |
problems in order of priority. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Individuals may have different priorities than Gentoo as a whole and |
| 18 |
that is and must be fine, but in that case Gentoo's high priority |
| 19 |
problems stay unsolved, and I do not at all think that it's |
| 20 |
catastrophical to have unfixed high priority problems. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
> You can't force anybody to work on the higher-priority ones. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Yes, you can't force anybody to do anything unless you motivate them, |
| 26 |
usually with money. The state of Gentoo always did and always will |
| 27 |
equal the sum of contributors' work. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
> Bottom line is that people work on what they work on. Unless you can |
| 31 |
> find people to work on the stuff that you want done you need to make |
| 32 |
> work go away. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
I certainly don't think the work needs to go away if the work is |
| 35 |
considered to be important. It's fine to have open bugs for years |
| 36 |
in the absence of a good solution. |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
Things happen when they happen. If someone cares then they fix and |
| 39 |
ideally it is so easy for them to contribute the fix that they will. |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
If noone cares then bugs stay unfixed and then the bugs don't matter. ;) |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
//Peter |
Archives