| 1 |
On Tue, 27 Jul 2004 16:37:03 -0400 Dylan Carlson <absinthe@g.o> |
| 2 |
wrote: |
| 3 |
| On Tuesday 27 July 2004 4:09 pm, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 4 |
| > Uh, no. They are assumptions based upon a very large body of direct |
| 5 |
| > evidence. Since we can't go and ask every single user what they |
| 6 |
| > think, that's the best we can get. |
| 7 |
| |
| 8 |
| No, that's the best you have, which is another way of saying, nothing. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
I'd hardly call 30,000 emails and however many forums posts there are |
| 11 |
"nothing". |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
| > No, the top-10 will end up containing "support reiser4 in g-d-s" and |
| 14 |
| > "add kernel-I'm-not-allowed-to-name to portage". See aforementioned |
| 15 |
| > OTW thread. |
| 16 |
| |
| 17 |
| Again, assumptions. Even if that were true, and most of our users |
| 18 |
| wanted reiser4 in g-d-s, then I hope we would at least give them some |
| 19 |
| time to consider it. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Go take a look at the thread. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
| b) Subtle but important to whom? You? Yes, I can see why letting |
| 24 |
| people vote would be a problem for you. It would potentially shift |
| 25 |
| the priorities from the things you feel are important to what the |
| 26 |
| users feel are important. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
No, subtle as in "this bug will cause people various really strange |
| 29 |
problems, but they won't realise what's causing it". Don't forget, the |
| 30 |
package maintainers quite often know a lot more about the package and |
| 31 |
the way it interacts with the system than the bug submitters and voters. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Good example: the automagic link detection before DHCP feature that |
| 34 |
people keep on wanting in baselayout. Looks nice on the surface, lots of |
| 35 |
people saying "yes please", but suddenly when it's implemented we get |
| 36 |
thousands of users with broken networking because it turns out that that |
| 37 |
nifty link detection feature isn't universally reliable. |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
| Because it encourages participation in the process of developing |
| 40 |
| Gentoo. It gives people a feature to tell us what's important to |
| 41 |
| them, instead of just filing bugs which, to some users, seem to be a |
| 42 |
| black hole. Voting gives people a simple way of expressing, "this is |
| 43 |
| important to me". |
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
See below... |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
| Perhaps it would lead to less people filing blocker/critical bugs if |
| 48 |
| they felt they could attract attention to a bug by other means. |
| 49 |
|
| 50 |
Assumptions |
| 51 |
|
| 52 |
| Really. How would enabling voting cause "serious problems" for |
| 53 |
| developers? |
| 54 |
| |
| 55 |
| 1. It doesn't change how you (or anyone else) is using Bugzilla |
| 56 |
| 2. It's a completely opt-in feature, for users and devs alike |
| 57 |
| 3. It can be quickly disabled at any time. |
| 58 |
|
| 59 |
Well, either the voting affects developers, in which case it's a serious |
| 60 |
problem because it'll detract from the bugs which are *actually* |
| 61 |
important, or it won't affect developers, in which case your claims |
| 62 |
above are effectively meaningless. |
| 63 |
|
| 64 |
-- |
| 65 |
Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Sparc, MIPS, Vim, Fluxbox) |
| 66 |
Mail : ciaranm at gentoo.org |
| 67 |
Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm |
Archives