=?ISO-8859-1?Q?st=E9phane_ducasse?= <ducasse at iam.unibe.ch> wrote:
> So I disagree with you, steven cannot say we need shorter iteration 
> cycles, stabler versions and not participate. There are certainly some 
> problems with the current process but it starts to work.
> Now we have to improve it this is clear, but without BFAV we would be 
> nowhere right now. 

Oh yes, I didn't mean everyone should go home.  I simply think it is the
wrong strategy to try and recruit armies of BFAV trawlers right now.  We
should first work on getting bugs *routed* to the right people.



In fact, I have been making a habit of emailing maintainers directly, if
the bug or fix involves a part of Squeak that has been packag-ized. 
This is very efficient, but it has the peculiar effect that the authors
don't get to use the BFAV niceties.  With categories, I could post to
BFAV with more confidence that the right person will see it.

As a quick case in point, I see six BFAV entries regarding StarBrowser
that have not been responded to, and some of them are really trivial. 
Is Roel even seeing these things?  It doesn't appear that he is, and
yet, everyone *else* who trawls BFAV is seeing them!



-Lex