Branko Collin wrote:
> On 24 Oct 2003, at 11:11, David Neary wrote:
> > How [regularly should I report progress on 1.3.x blockers]? 
> > Each time a bug on the list is resolved?
> > Given that there are so few, I think this is reasonable... Or
> > when someone claims a bug and starts working on it, to avoid
> > duplication of effort?
> Not wanting to butt in, but 'each week' seems a more sensible metric. 

If we're talking on the list, it's because we want feedback, as
well as keeping everyone informed, so you're not butting in at all.

I disagree that once a week is often enough. The list I posted
was from 3 days ago, and already several of the bugs have been
addressed. In addition, someone indicated that they wanted to
work on a bug which someone else is already working on. 

> That way, if progress on several bugs is stalled for some reason, you 
> can say so, and others can see if they might be able to help. Also, 
> it forces you to look at what the actual progress is.

Given that we're already behind our provisional schedule, and
we're going to be cutting it close for a 2.0 this year, I would
hope that the list will be very short next week... 

There are several bugs that could be addressed by anyone with
some time to spend. It would be nice if some people piped up and
claimed one. Of the outstanding bugs, I think that 125141
(following on from the comments of Sven) and 116606 are quite
easily doable. Who feels like implementing instantaneous save of
GimpItems and attacking libgimpmisc*?

(hint: that was an invitation to pipe up)


       David Neary,
       Lyon, France
Gimp-developer mailing list

Reply via email to