On May 15, 2011, at 12:17 AM, Pat Maddox wrote: > On May 14, 2011, at 12:50 PM, Marcus Denker wrote: > >> >> On May 14, 2011, at 8:54 PM, Pat Maddox wrote: >>> >>> That would be awesome! I was looking at the bug tracker >>> (http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/list#) yesterday to see if there >>> were things that I could help with...but even when looking at "open" >>> issues, many of them are several years old, and have a state of "Accepted." >>> So as someone not actively involved in pharo development, I have absolutely >>> no clue what actually needs to be fixed. >>> >>> I'd like to help, the bug tracker doesn't give me much guidance (or at >>> least I'd benefit from an explanation of how it's structured), and so >>> guidance from someone who's active would be really helpful. >>> >> So the best thing is to just do exactly that: Write that it's unclear what >> needs to be done. >> >> Every Issue on the tracker should have a clear "next action needed to be >> done to move this forward" defined. I not, than the next action is to define >> the next action. > > So what's the deal with these 261 Accepted tickets? Have they been fixed and > committed to Pharo?
No. Everything not shown has been dealt with. (3792 Issues to date). All the ones shown (435) require action. Some of that action might "this has already been fixed" "this is not a good idea"... > or have they simply been acknowledged as a problem? > The states "new" and "accepted" are not really well used right now... one problem is thart issues created by developers are automatically "Accepted", so it's not much of a guidance. > When viewing open tickets, here are the statuses I see: > * Accepted > * Comment > * FixProposed > * FixedWaitingToBePharoed > * New > * Started We should change that... maybe we should have a more "next action" based system. "NextActionNeeded" "SourceNeeded" "CodeReviewNeeded" .... -- Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD.
