getting bugs to the right people

Marcus Denker denker at
Fri Jun 4 16:09:41 UTC 2004


Yes, you are right. Having all the bugs and fixes sorted would help
a lot. There are so many posting that I as a harvester
just can't act uppon in any senseful way...

(e.g. those eToys enhancements, and all fixes for packages that
have maintainers).

It would be nice to have a BFAV with categories: All issues are sent
to the inbox, and then sorted to the categories... even inside a defined
package we have multiple threads about the same problem. It would
be great to group those, too...


Am 03.06.2004 um 19:32 schrieb Lex Spoon:

> I spent an hour or so yesterday trawling through BFAV, and so now I 
> feel
> like a real user and have grounds to point out a, umm, missing feature.
> Most of the things I see being unreviewed are things that very specific
> people *can* address or *should* address.  For example, if there is a
> bug in the MorphicWrappers package or the Comanche, then only the
> maintainer of that package can really address and close the bug.  I'm
> not sure that these people are always seeing the bugs at all.
> Further, I'm not sure that *I* should be seeing them as a random BFAV 
> reviewer.  It's truly mindnumbing to go through tons of bugs on
> packages that you don't know much about.
> Along these lines, sometimes we do not have a maintainer when we
> probably should.  As a particular example, is anyone in charge of
> maintaining etoys as time goes by?  Someone posted a changeset that 
> adds
> a new command to all etoy objects, but this is the kind of improvement
> that cannot be evaluated by itself.  The exact set of commands included
> in etoys is very much a matter of taste and it requires that some take 
> a
> look at all the options and choose a set of commands that make sense as
> a whole.  These decisions can't effectively be made one at a time.
> Similarly, we can't really evaluate whether one small change to buttons
> should be included; it takes a UI designer to look at a set of changes
> and evaluate them as a whole.  It wouldn't work to simply start sending
> in one changeset at a time from Zurgle; Zurgle should be included all 
> or
> nothing.
> Here's a feature that could address these concerns:  attach *every* bug
> to some specific package.  That way, the appropriate people can see the
> message, because BFAV can automatically email the maintainer of the
> package.  Further, inapporpriate people can *avoid* seeing the message;
> unless I look at MorphicWrapper bugs I won't see them.  Note, by the
> way, that we can also have a "don't know" package to assign bugs when
> the user really doesn't know.  This is especially acceptible if it is
> possible to reassign bugs after they have been created.
> Just a thought.  Your eyes do not deceive you, and there is no code
> attached to this email.  :)
> Lex

More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list