Blake Ross wrote:
> I don't believe this would be a useful keyword, but rather another in a
> long and growing list of cruft.
Well, this may be some of the very rare cruft that is actually aimed at
novices. Surely the rest is unused or used mostly by (the very few)
experienced developers
>
>>
>> 1. This new KW would be most beneficial in getting the attention of
>> *novice programmers* and experienced programmers who need a short
>> break/diversion/easy success to identify simple bugs that are often
>> overlooked because the feature is already "good enough" (but not really)
>> as it is, or is not on the "we must do the other critical bugs first"
>> list..
>
> Prove it. Gerv, Doron and many others (who started as qa, then went to
> easy development, then harder development) didn't seem to have any
> problems.
So you can name a handful of people who got by without adequate tools.
We need many more developers than we have, and am not making an attempt
to make it easier for them.
>
>>
>>
>> 2. minor, trivial and enhancement *ONLY* indicate the "importance" of
>> a bug. They give NO indication of the "complexity" of a bug.
>
> The 99% case is that they do provide a very clear indication, i.e.
>
> *Trivial: cosmetic problem like misspelled words or misaligned text*
Trivial does not cover enhancement request, which are the most neglected
according to regular users (like me).
Minor is for when there is a workaround - NOT for enhancements or easy
fixes.
> We've also got the polish keyword
Polish is only for UI.
>> A bug could very well have a "trivial" severity and be quite
>> "difficult" to fix. Likewise, a bug could be a "blocker" but very
>> "easy" to fix. This would be an *extreme but obvious+ case of
>> *LoRiskHiReward*.
>
> Yes, we could categorize bugs in a million ways. You'll need to show
> that there's demand for this keyword.
No, it makes just as little/much sense to say: you need to prove there
is no demand. The fact is that beginner programmers (unlike you) will
likely appreciate this point-of-entry.
>> 3. The reason nobody has come to fix the 20 bugs I listed in this bug
>> (see my bug) is because nobody knows to look for them. Another clear
>> indication that we desperately need a way for beginner or
>> casual/occasional contributers to help move this project along.
>
> Says you. Frankly I don't see the problems you describe. I've seen
> tons and tons of people start small in the project and go far.
Well, we need mega-tons of people then ;)
> --Blake
--
Regards,
Peter Lairo
