Interestingly enough you have both read Tomas in completely the opposite way I have.
"... you should keep in touch with people that might have interest in helping you get your patches in. Sometimes people just drop some patches and wait for others to care about them. And it doesn't work like that most of the time. Keeping in touch means contacting them, explain things, ask for feedback on specific edges." I read this as, people sometimes dump their patches out and that is the last you ever hear from them. They get some feedback but nothing is ever done. There are tons of them (most of them in the failed QA and patch does not apply queues). So like everything in life its a 2 way street. Tomas was making the point for big patches you need to engage. There are so many patches/bugs updated every day, reaching out to people to tell them about your one is really the only way you will get it noticed. Not to negate that we can always do better signing off. However we are currently working on getting a big patch through now, it takes time, but its possible. If it wasnt, we'd still all be using HTML::Template::Pro :) Chris * David Cook ([email protected]) wrote:
I agree with Marcel.Admittedly, I haven’t been doing much testing lately. In 2015 and 2016, I have had other projects which have diverted my attention, but generally I try to test anything, so long as it’s small enough to fit in the time I have to devote to testing.I suppose that’s harder for larger patches, since everyone has finite time. Plus FIFO isn’t always the best idea, because there are going to be some patches which should be prioritized over others, although perhaps that’s where severity comes into play a bit. Or maybe the QA team could have a sort of roster where some people just deal with critical bugs, some people deal with features, etc? I don’t know if that’s feasible either though. I wanted to join the QA team long ago, but I know I don’t have the time to devote to it…As a developer, I know I’m apprehensive about submitting some of my latest work, because I think it’s too big for anyone to sign off or QA, so I’ve been thinking about feasible ways of setting it up as third-party software and just adding hooks to Koha, which have a better chance of making it in.So long as I’m supporting Koha, I’ll be writing patches for it, but I’m probably not going to even try to upstream something unless I think someone is going to look at it. I think that’s the key… I don’t need a guarantee that it’ll make it into Koha. If it’s not good enough, it’s not good enough, and it’ll need more work from me.But as a community it would be good to at least have eyes on more patches and some comments, even if it’s from someone who doesn’t have the authority to Pass QA. In fact, that’s something I’ve done a little bit in 2016. While I might not have the time to test a patch, I try to review the code, and offer up some comments that might help the developer. If that’s something others would find useful, maybe I could try to build in some code review into my day/week? Maybe that’s a bug wrangler task?David Cook Systems Librarian Prosentient Systems 72/330 Wattle St Ultimo, NSW 2007 AustraliaOffice: 02 9212 0899 Direct: 02 8005 0595From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Marcel de Rooy Sent: Friday, 13 January 2017 1:49 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Koha-devel] [NEW_TOPIC] Getting bugs further> I guess there's no straight answer. It will depend on signoffers and QA people's opinion. People tend to focus on the stuff they care, lately, so that's why I said...> Sometimes people just drop some patches and wait for others to care about them. And it doesn't work like that most of the time.Shouldn’t we as a community do something about this evolving trend then? If we scare away developers by ignoring their patches, the community is not better off in the long run (imo). So, we should signoff or QA not only what we need or like. Isn’t that something for the bug wranglers too?Marcel
_______________________________________________ Koha-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel website : http://www.koha-community.org/ git : http://git.koha-community.org/ bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/
-- Chris Cormack Catalyst IT Ltd. +64 4 803 2238 PO Box 11-053, Manners St, Wellington 6142, New Zealand
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Koha-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel website : http://www.koha-community.org/ git : http://git.koha-community.org/ bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/
