| 1 |
On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 1:14 PM William Hubbs <williamh@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 12:18:54PM -0500, Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 4 |
> > |
| 5 |
> > I think that this depends a bit on your definition of "no action." Do |
| 6 |
> > you mean no final decision? Or simply no activity? The former is |
| 7 |
> > easy to measure, the latter is going to potentially a lot of heartbeat |
| 8 |
> > activities that just kick the can. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> with all respect, did you even read Matt's comment above? We are |
| 11 |
> discussing bugs that get ignored. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
I've completely read every email in this thread. I'm well-aware of |
| 14 |
your frustration. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
My point is that measuring "no action" is a lot harder than just |
| 17 |
having a casual conversation about it. If you want to trigger some |
| 18 |
kind of escalation you actually need to define the trigger. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Also, you need to consider that the presence of a trigger could |
| 21 |
influence what happens. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Right now maybe a bug gets filed with no comments for 4 weeks. You |
| 24 |
set up a rule that a bug with no comments after 2 weeks gets |
| 25 |
escalated. Suddenly every bug has a comment every week, but no real |
| 26 |
progress. What you measure is what you get. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
I'm not trying to be obstructive. I'm just pointing out that simple |
| 29 |
policies end up not being so simple when they involve stuff that is |
| 30 |
this warm and fuzzy. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
That is why I suggested that final decisions are more measurable. |
| 33 |
Resolved bugs are easier to measure than "active" bugs. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
But, you could at least require periodic comments on bugs. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
> Do you seriously believe that ignoring all requests for intervention is |
| 38 |
> an improvement or is this trolling? |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
It isn't intended as trolling at all. I'm just pointing out what |
| 41 |
might be perceived as a problem, or not. |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
Those who object to Proctors taking action at all probably consider it |
| 44 |
an improvement. Those who feel otherwise have yet to actually say |
| 45 |
anything about the current state. It is really hard to tell what the |
| 46 |
general sentiment is. When Proctors so much as issues a warning we |
| 47 |
usually end up with 30 post arguments on the lists. I've yet to see a |
| 48 |
single post complaining about all the bugs that have been dormant, or |
| 49 |
emails sent to the alias that didn't lead to bugs. |
| 50 |
|
| 51 |
I'll also comment that in some of these cases the tone of the threads |
| 52 |
that triggered the bugs tended to improve after the bugs were filed, |
| 53 |
which probably also lead to increased hesitation to intervene. |
| 54 |
|
| 55 |
I guess my overall point is that I do think these are serious issues. |
| 56 |
I just don't see what the answer is. I'm always happy to chat about |
| 57 |
them. If you're not sure if I'm trolling, perhaps consider just |
| 58 |
asking me instead of posting accusations on the lists. |
| 59 |
|
| 60 |
And, honestly, this reaction is part of why nobody probably likes |
| 61 |
bringing these issues up. They're just unpleasant to talk about, and |
| 62 |
there is a lot of difference in opinion. Who wants to deal with that? |
| 63 |
|
| 64 |
-- |
| 65 |
Rich |
Archives