For the 0.44 release, we will be making an attempt to close critical bugs in the bug tracker. However, first those bugs need to be prioritized.
We have a system for prioritizing bugs, and it's pretty straightforward to do, even by someone with minimal technical experience. Thus this makes an excellent task for someone who wants to contribute to Inkscape but haven't found other tasks they're comfortable doing.
Basically, you go through the bug tracker and review bugs set to priority 5 (the default). If it involves a crash, data loss, or other serious issues, mark it critical (9). Otherwise, mark it 6 if it looks important, or 3 if it looks like a lower priority issue.
If you're interested in helping in this area, contact me either on IRC or by email, and I can set up your access and help you get started!
Thanks, Bryce
On Tue, 16 May 2006, Bryce Harrington wrote:
Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 14:26:15 -0700 From: Bryce Harrington <bryce@...983...> Reply-To: inkscape-user@lists.sourceforge.net To: inkscape-devel@...84..., inkscape-user@...84... Subject: [Inkscape-user] Bug Organizer person needed
For the 0.44 release, we will be making an attempt to close critical bugs in the bug tracker. However, first those bugs need to be prioritized.
We have a system for prioritizing bugs, and it's pretty straightforward to do, even by someone with minimal technical experience. Thus this makes an excellent task for someone who wants to contribute to Inkscape but haven't found other tasks they're comfortable doing.
Basically, you go through the bug tracker and review bugs set to priority 5 (the default). If it involves a crash, data loss, or other serious issues, mark it critical (9). Otherwise, mark it 6 if it looks important, or 3 if it looks like a lower priority issue.
I do try and help with this occassionally but i get pissed off by all the redundant anonymous reports by people who fail to check existing reports and even when they do make an original suggest are unavailable to provide any feedback. Certainly throwing more people at it is one way to improve the situation.
I can understand why Inkscape wanted to allow anonymous reports at first but there is no shortage of people willing to suggest new features and I think leaving it open creates unnecessary work for very little reward.
Far as i can tell there is no way to mark anonymous reports with a lower starting score than reports of properly logged in users, which would be my preferred solution. The only choice seems to be to block anonymous reports completely.
The roadmap is often very helpful when it comes to managing user expectations and giving some idea of when a feature might be implemented. Conversely it would be good to have a shortlist of things considered beyond the scope of Inkscape, or at least a few polite notes from the developers pointing out that Inkscape is not. Explaining that SVG and EPS are the standard interchange formats and it is not practical to support all the file formats we might like ... but patchers are welcome etc. might also be worth mentioning. Even if users do not read such a policy document it at least allows bug triagers to post the link and spend less time explaining why some feature requests are exteremly unlikely to ever be implemented.
Hopefully more people will volunteer and there are other ways we can improve the quality of the requests but please do consider requiring users to at least be logged in to file bugs if it continues to be difficult to maintain.
lucychili has stepped up to help with the organization work. Thanks!
We've got enough bugs to triage that it would be beneficial to have one or two others to help, even if just temporarily, so if you can spare an afternoon or so in the near future, please do!
On Wed, May 17, 2006 at 03:44:52AM +0100, Alan Horkan wrote:
On Tue, 16 May 2006, Bryce Harrington wrote:
Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 14:26:15 -0700 From: Bryce Harrington <bryce@...983...> Reply-To: inkscape-user@lists.sourceforge.net To: inkscape-devel@...84..., inkscape-user@...84... Subject: [Inkscape-user] Bug Organizer person needed
For the 0.44 release, we will be making an attempt to close critical bugs in the bug tracker. However, first those bugs need to be prioritized.
We have a system for prioritizing bugs, and it's pretty straightforward to do, even by someone with minimal technical experience. Thus this makes an excellent task for someone who wants to contribute to Inkscape but haven't found other tasks they're comfortable doing.
Basically, you go through the bug tracker and review bugs set to priority 5 (the default). If it involves a crash, data loss, or other serious issues, mark it critical (9). Otherwise, mark it 6 if it looks important, or 3 if it looks like a lower priority issue.
I do try and help with this occassionally but i get pissed off by all the redundant anonymous reports by people who fail to check existing reports and even when they do make an original suggest are unavailable to provide any feedback.
Then would you be open to helping with the triage of just new bug reports that were submitted by a signed-in person?
(Regarding restricting anonymous bug posts, that's a fairly well-worn thread, and it doesn't sound like there's much new to add. Yes, they're annoying, but the people who are actually working on the bugs find them to be worth their trouble, so I feel that makes them worth ours as well.)
The roadmap is often very helpful when it comes to managing user expectations and giving some idea of when a feature might be implemented. Conversely it would be good to have a shortlist of things considered beyond the scope of Inkscape, or at least a few polite notes from the developers pointing out that Inkscape is not. Explaining that SVG and EPS are the standard interchange formats and it is not practical to support all the file formats we might like ... but patchers are welcome etc. might also be worth mentioning. Even if users do not read such a policy document it at least allows bug triagers to post the link and spend less time explaining why some feature requests are exteremly unlikely to ever be implemented.
The FAQ is probably the right policy document for this. I believe this is already covered in there, but you could doublecheck. The FAQ could certainly use a review at this point; it's been quite a while since it was last updated.
Bryce
participants (2)
-
Alan Horkan -
Bryce Harrington