Hello, On 13.09.2012 10:40, Martin Pitt wrote: > Daniel Holbach [2012-09-11 11:25 +0200]: >> Also with many projects using 'bitesize' for their bugs we now have >> tasks which might be 'bitesize' in the context of a particular package >> (ie if you know a bit about the code base already), but in general they >> might be hard for somebody who's new to everything. >> >> We should probably refer to the bitesize bugs in the wiki page, but have >> other tasks as well, which can be solved by the step-1-to-step-10 approach. > > That seems to assume that there are significant classes of bugs which > affect all packages alike? It seems to me that this reduces the > opportunities pretty much to things like spelling errors or > translation updates, and these are already covered. For actual wrong > behaviour (what most bug reports are about), you necessarily have to > get some package specific knowledge? > > The step 1 to 10 should certainly encompass how to get the source, > point to patch system docs, forwarding patch to upstream, put it into > the sponsoring queue etc, but I don't see how we can create steps to > fix actual bugs without knowing what package we are talking about?
Yes, I agree. There are different classes of bugs and different approaches. That's why we try to classify them on the wiki page. All I tried to say with regard to 'bitesize' that we have a problem because it's not used very much generally (some teams like Unity do), and that 'easy' sometimes just means 'easy for somebody who knows the code' which leaves a bunch of new contributors wondering how to get started with the bug. Have a great day, Daniel -- Get involved in Ubuntu development! developer.ubuntu.com/packaging And follow @ubuntudev on identi.ca/twitter.com/facebook.com/gplus.to -- ubuntu-devel mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
