Obviously there is a lot of frustration about the bugtracker. I think the root of this frustration is the following three problems:
1) A lack of consensus as to what means what (eg. does the mere presence of an open bug imply that it must be fixed?) 2) A lack of consensus as to who is responsible for what (who decides what must be fixed?) 3) The bugtracker is permitted to get out of sync with reality (caused by 1 and 2) For 1), I think the best philosophy is to keep things as simple as possible. What is the purpose of a bugtracker? I would say its as a record of what problems people have discovered, and also a snapshot of what tasks must be completed in order to meet some target event (currently the 0.8 release). I think these two roles get confused - simply recording a problem should not immediately create an expectation that it will be fixed. That determination should probably be made only by someone actually willing and able to fix it. I think we should probably try to have a weekly "bug-scrub", where we quickly go through all outstanding bugs and confirm that any associated metadata (time estimates, completion status, target milestone, assignee etc) is correct. This process has worked well for me in other environments, although they were commercial, not voluntary. As for whether this should be over IRC, or perhaps over Skype I'm not sure, my past experience it was all verbal and that seemed to work nicely. Thoughts? Ian. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20101021/6a766e9d/attachment.html>
