On 02/09/16 12:07, Adrian Bunk wrote: > On Fri, Sep 02, 2016 at 12:06:40AM +0200, Tomasz Nitecki wrote: >> <CUT> >> That is why we are showing RFS opportunities (those are useful mostly >> for DDs as they are the only ones that can sponsor) or ITAs. It is also >> why we are going to get notified when a package was removed from testing >> over a year ago - it is also an opportunity for contribution, but not >> necessarily one that is a good starting point for a newcomer. > > Why not? > > The devtodo package I gave as example for a package removed more than > a year ago from testing is a very simple program, and the RC bug #779551 > that keeps it out of testing would be a good training task for a newbie > who wants to become a maintainer - if it wouldn't already contain a > patch that fixes the bug since March 2015. > > No matter whether a package was removed from testing 3 months ago or > 3 years ago, the root cause is usually that the maintainer is MIA > (or at least temporarily lacking time for working on Debian).
Sure, some removed packages will only require applying provided patch.
Others might require much more work - resolving RC bugs, packaging new
version, updating packaging, etc. And the longer the package was
removed, the more likely it is that it will require more work. Nothing
bad about it (I fully agree that we should show those older removed
packages!), my point was that many of those opportunities might not be
appropriate for newcomers.
>> And that is also why a user can configure how-can-i-help to show (or
>> hide) specific opportunity types. Newcomer can configure it to show only
>> 'newcomer' opportunities, veteran DD might like to be shown everything.
>
> My point is that an ITA is not an opportunity to contribute.
>
> No matter whether this is a newcomer, or a veteran DD who is not
> otherwise involved with QA.
OK, I understand that. That is why you can just remove those from your
listing if they are not useful to you.
>> <CUT>
>
> While the tools might actually work on the same data and do similar
> things, the target audience is completely different for "how-can-i-help"
> and "debian-qa-helper"[1].
>
> how-can-i-help shows a list of confirmed and likely opportunities to an
> audience as large as possible, and if one random person takes care of a
> specific opportunity that's a success.
>
> QA cleanup tasks should be carried out on a continuous basis by a small
> and relatively stable group of people.
>
> If a newcomer wrongly believes that he can or should do anything with
> an ITA bug displayed by how-can-i-help, then this will cause trouble.
I can also understand that it might be confusing for newcomers that we
are showing them ITAs or RFSs (as those aren't much useful for newcomers
too). However, how-can-i-help users have varying levels of experience
and use hcih in many different ways. I'd rather not break their flows by
removing some opportunity types.
Still, I'd like to make hcih remain more of 'debian-qa-helper' for those
who want it and more of 'good-starting-opportunities' for newcomers.
Since we can already configure what is displayed to the user, I'd
suggest that we add some default profiles ('newcomer', 'dd', 'qa') with
appropriate opportunity types. The only question is how should a profile
be chosen - during install? Or maybe we just throw some profile
templates and put a notice in the manpage?
By the way - web based QA tools show all packages. How-can-i-help limits
those to packages that you use or you care about. Usually people are
much more willing to help if they will be also helping themselves.
Regards,
T.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
