Clean up BFAV?
Marcus Denker
marcus at ira.uka.de
Thu Jan 8 08:50:06 UTC 2004
Am 08.01.2004 um 03:00 schrieb Julian Fitzell:
> Yes!
>
> The most depressing thing about reviewing fixes is that you know you
> aren't going to make a dent. And the most depressing thing about
> submitting fixes is that you know they may well get lost in all the
> volume. If we could keep the list to 20-50 items then we would be far
> more likely to fire up BFAV and try to bring the list back down to 0.
>
> Bugs and fixes that old either:
>
> - won't be relevant anymore; or
> - won't work in the new image anyway; or
> - will be posted in an incorrect format (according to your examination)
>
> I think there's so much chaffe in there, that we are more than
> justified in forcibly drafting the authors in to help separate the
> wheat. And I'm personally willing to risk missing a few gems if the
> trade off is that the gems we all create in the future get integrated
> faster.
>
Yes, I think we should close all really old submissions. Let's pick
some date and just do it. We should
-> sent a mail to the author and squeak-dev with an explanation
-> close the submission in BFAV
We should start with the oldest, and gradually move forward. Not too
many at once, we need to have
everyone have a chance to look at the closed items.
I even vote for not defining a fixed date, but simply define that
everything older than one
year gets this special timeout treatment.
I suggested this some time ago, and this was apposed. But those who
argued against it didn't do
anything else than talking: There was not a single review of pre 2003
submissions besides a handfull
that I did myself!
Marcus
--
Marcus Denker marcus at ira.uka.de
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|