On Dec 8, 2012, at 10:51 AM, Eduard Moraru <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi, > > > On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 6:09 PM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> On Dec 7, 2012, at 4:47 PM, Sergiu Dumitriu <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On 12/07/2012 07:56 AM, Vincent Massol wrote: >>>> >>>> On Dec 7, 2012, at 1:47 PM, "Ecaterina Moraru (Valica)" < >> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> The results for the #bugfixingday #8 held on 6 November 2012 are at >>>>> http://www.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Blog/BugFixingDay+December+2012 >>>>> >>>>> Great job everyone for closing 43 issues (and fixing 13). >>>>> >>>>> The next #bugfixingday is planned for 3rd of January 2013 (first >> Thursday >>>>> of every month). >>>> >>>> Yes many thanks to those who participated. >>>> >>>> We still have 45 bugs to be back in the green though…. >>>> >>>> I have the feeling that we should intensify a bit the BFD and I think >> it would be good to be doing this once every 2 weeks so that we're in the >> green as a rule instead of the opposite being the norm…. WDYT? >>> >>> I'd be a full +1 for this, except that I find that when something >>> happens too often, people tend to lose interest and the participation >>> will decrease. In the end, the marginal number of bugs will stay the >>> same, it's just the frequency that will change. >> >> Yes I know. We need to find the good frequency so that devs don't loose >> interest and participation is high enough. But ATM some devs could not >> participate because they had something planned for the BFD day #8 and if we >> have more maybe overall we'll have more participation? >> >> I've racked my brain and I don't have a better idea for being in the green >> than BFDs at the moment… >> > > Well, another option is that we decide to systematically close bugs (not > new features/improvements/etc) that are older than say... 2-3 years. I have > noticed in this latest BFD that there are a lot of bugs that are no longer > reproducible and most of them are for the old versions that don`t even > behave the same way and that most of the stuff got rewritten in the process. > If we like, we could try to improve that and (maybe reduce the window to > 1-2 years but) only close issues that have no comments/reactions to them. > > Alternatively, there's the thing that Fedora does (and probably others) > where they systematically close bugs that are older than 2 versions > (basically older than the stable version that they support). > > I guess there could be other ways that work for getting rid of old and > invalid bugs that are polluting jira. > > Of course, this does not address active and valid bugs (since they need to > actually be fixed), but I think it would be a step towards the right > direction. So you suggest to close all bugs that are older than 2 years systematically or do you suggest to only close not valid bugs? If the later how do you know it's still valid? I personally don't like too much closing valid bugs. I agree about closing bugs that cannot be reproduced (which is what we do) but I'm not sure I like too much closing valid bugs even if they're old. However I think it's a good strategy that during the BFD we start our closing bug hunt by looking at oldest bugs first (this is what I've done several times personally). The only issue is that we run the risk of looking at the same bugs and thus stepping on the toes of the others ;) Thanks -Vincent > Thanks, > Eduard > >> >> Ideas welcome… Do others think that 2 a month is too much? IMO we could >> try and see how it goes for a few times and then decide. >> >> Thanks >> -Vincent >> >>> Anyway, I'll do my best no matter the frequency. >>> -- >>> Sergiu Dumitriu >>> http://purl.org/net/sergiu >> _______________________________________________ >> devs mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs >> > _______________________________________________ > devs mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
