On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 12:36 PM, Bardur Arantsson <s...@scientician.net> wrote: > On 25-02-2015 19:21, lennart spitzner wrote: >> I am not convinced. how does closing ~40 out of ~700 open tickets make >> the contributors more effective? that demand exceeds resources is >> true, but it is no argument for closing issues. many of the issues >> represent sensible ideas for features that do not need new feedback. >> > > Well, it's a *start* at reducing the ridiculous number of outdated > issues. Nobody is served by having huge numbers of outdated issues in an > issue tracker. It's demotivating and the likelihood of an issue being > fixed (or implemented, or...) decreases exponentially the longer it's > been in a tracker... which is usually fair enough since it must mean > that it's not *that* important after all. > >> I'd say the general lack of stability and the recently mentioned >> lack of tests are the main problems of Cabal; >> to a degree this looks like shooting at symptoms. > > That may certainly be the case. You should feel to contribute fixes for > any of the existing issues -- that would help the Cabal maintainer(s) > enormously, I suspect.
On a related note, I'm tagging issues with 'documentation' or 'easy' as I find them. Either should be do-able for a first-time contributor. In particular, the 'easy' issues are ones I think I could talk a Haskell programmer through in a 1-2 paragraphs; something I think a first-time contributor could knock out in an afternoon. Periodically, folks ask about small projects for advanced students. I know Cabal's not hip and exciting, or whatever, but please think of us. -- Thomas Tuegel _______________________________________________ cabal-devel mailing list cabal-devel@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cabal-devel
