| 1 |
On 16/01/2014 19:56, Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 10:54 AM, Peter Stuge <peter@×××××.se> wrote: |
| 3 |
>> Sergey Popov wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> As i said earlier, problem begins when we NEED to stabilize |
| 5 |
>>> something to prevent breakages and arch teams are slow. |
| 6 |
>> |
| 7 |
>> Isn't that simply a matter of assigning and respecting priority on |
| 8 |
>> bugs properly? |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> Are you suggesting that we should forbid people from working on |
| 11 |
> lower-priority bugs anytime a higher-priority bug exists? That would |
| 12 |
> probably just reduce the amount of contribution. You can't force |
| 13 |
> anybody to work on the higher-priority ones. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> Sure, in an ideal world people work on the high-priority stuff. |
| 16 |
> However, often somebody either prefers to work on a lower-priority |
| 17 |
> bug, or finds it easier to do so. Simply marking a bug as |
| 18 |
> high-priority doesn't make the bug get resolved. |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> Bottom line is that people work on what they work on. Unless you can |
| 21 |
> find people to work on the stuff that you want done you need to make |
| 22 |
> work go away. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
+1 |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
"Respecting bug priority" feels like that corporate BS I have to put up |
| 27 |
with every day. Like every sysadmin team world-wide, we're understaffed |
| 28 |
so the only bugs that get any attention at all are ones where some fool |
| 29 |
of a manager thinks he can shout louder than anyone else. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Gentoo is not like that. As you say, devs will work on what they feel |
| 32 |
like working on, heavily influenced by their own sense of |
| 33 |
responsibility. We have nothing to offer maintainers except |
| 34 |
fuzzy-feel-good and recognition; we have to trust them to do the right |
| 35 |
thing. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
-- |
| 39 |
Alan McKinnon |
| 40 |
alan.mckinnon@×××××.com |
Archives