[squeak-dev] Re: Mantis status meanings
andreas.raab at gmx.de
Tue Sep 7 16:01:00 UTC 2010
On 9/7/2010 8:03 AM, Hannes Hirzel wrote:
> On 9/7/10, Andreas Raab<andreas.raab at gmx.de> wrote:
>> On 9/6/2010 8:32 PM, Sean P. DeNigris wrote:
>>> Ken Causey wrote:
>> The reality is that Mantis is completely overloaded with old crap. And
>> we lack the man power to keep it current (if you're willing to help
>> you're more than welcome). I think that what we should probably do is to
>> just close all bugs older than two years to get a handle on it.
> I support this proposal. We could just mark them as 'Expired' with a
> note saying something like.
> "This bug has not had any attention for more than two years so it is
> considered to be 'Expired' and was closed. It might be that the issue
> has been addressed in the latest Squeak 4.1 trunk image, it might as
> well be that the issue is still open or it could be that it does not
> apply anymore. If you are interested in this bug please do further
> investigations and consider reopening it again".
What do peopple think of the idea of starting over? From what I've seen
at Google code I much prefer their issue tracker. And there's a wiki
associated with it that can hold information such as we just discussed.
>> perhaps close 'em all and start over. The real problem with bug trackers
>> is that if they're not kept current all the time they tend to simply
>>> My only outstanding question is: should I not bother entering things in
>>> Mantis and just upload to the inbox and be done with it? That would be
>>> simpler, obviously, but what's the most helpful?
> Inbox is fine and we do not want to force people to use it. However
> for documentation issues we (Michael, Casey, Sean and me) want to give
> it a try. Our efforts have been modest so far but we want to do what
> is possible with our time constraints.
> BTW there is an RSS feed of open documentation issues
>> At this point, the most effective approach is likely to just upload to
>> the inbox. Since uploads are posted here we see them (we don't see bugs
>> on Mantis that are posted, fixed, etc. - one of the major shortcomings).
>> If the fix looks all right you've got a chance it'll be in. And if you
>> provide a test, you got a *good* chance it'll go in.
More information about the Squeak-dev