[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
List: kde-devel
Subject: Re: "Gardening" old bugreports
From: Justin Zobel <justin.zobel () gmail ! com>
Date: 2023-01-19 11:49:34
Message-ID: CAKwKLy_b6WFkvBBxi6BQobKT4zrtHZrsmn3JtqiQ6AKdzqx8iA () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]
Involvement not evolvement.
On Thu, 19 Jan 2023, 10:06 pm Justin Zobel, <justin.zobel@gmail.com> wrote:
> In the regard then it falls to developers with the understanding of the
> codebase to triage these.
>
> However it's clear due to the age of these bugs that most developers don't
> have time or aren't prioritising these reports.
>
> This is why I've volunteered time to try get engagement happening with
> community (the bug reporters) to help confirm these issues still exist and
> if they do, try and encourage evolvement from the project maintainers.
>
> Regards,
>
> Justin
>
> On Thu, 19 Jan 2023, 9:56 pm Nicolas Fella, <nicolas.fella@gmx.de> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Am 19.01.23 um 04:04 schrieb Justin:
>> > Hi Nicolas,
>> >
>> > This has been discussed with Nate Graham directly who has approved
>> > this cleanup of Bugzilla including the messaging behind it.
>>
>> KDE consists of more than Nate tough. We discuss and "review" things in
>> the open.
>>
>> >
>> > I am happy to discuss any concerns that people have around this. I
>> > understand Krita requested we exclude them from any gardening and that
>> > has been done, however this is the only feedback I have received.
>> >
>> > The gardening team aims to find out if the bug reports are still
>> > relevant by involving the users who reported them in determining if
>> > they are still valid. This increases community involvement and helps
>> > KDE as there isn't anywhere near enough manpower to review the
>> > thousands upon thousands of bugs that haven't been touched in years.
>>
>> Anecdotally many people don't like such automated changes being done to
>> their bugreports that don't actually engage with the content of the
>> report.
>>
>> >
>> > The bugs that we are interacting with are ones that have not had any
>> > activity for over 2 years. We are simply trying to reinvigorate
>> > discussion on those bugs to see if they are still valid. If the user
>> > does not reply within the standard 30 day period after a bug is set to
>> > NEEDSINFO, it is automatically closed by the Bug Janitor.
>> >
>> > I am not simply closing bugs, so I do take offense that care is not
>> > applied.
>>
>> Properly "triaging" old reports requires at least some level of
>> understanding of the project, codebase etc. I'm afraid there is no
>> simple solution to that and rule-based approaches aren't good enough.
>> Even taking things like CONFIRMED status or wishlist priority into
>> account assumes that these have actually been consistently applied.
>>
>> >
>> > I will halt it until it is approved by more developers. However if it
>> > is decided that it isn't wanted then the KDE as a whole will need to
>> > entice more people in sorting old bugs individually as it is clearly
>> > not a priority right now for the majority.
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> >
>> > Justin
>> >
>> Don't get me wrong, I do appreciate the initiative of cleaning up bugs.
>> But we do need to handle this with a lot of care to avoid it backfiring.
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Nico
>>
>>
>> > On 19/1/23 11:05, Nicolas Fella wrote:
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> can we please put the effort of "gardening" old bugreports on hold
>> until
>> >> we figured out whether this is actually something we want to do?
>> Several
>> >> people already expressed concerns about this.
>> >>
>> >> Improperly applied such mass changes can do more harm than good. We may
>> >> close bugreports that are actually still useful just because nobody
>> >> replied on then in a relatively short timeframe.
>> >>
>> >> Properly cleaning up old bugreports is important. However, it requires
>> >> some level of care and expertise to judge whether a bugreport is still
>> >> useful. Judging by the volume of bugreports that is pinged with the
>> same
>> >> copy&paste message this care is not applied here.
>> >>
>> >> At minimum such initiatives should be announced and discussed before
>> >> doing them, to allow people to give their input on the proposal. I am
>> >> not aware of any such announcement/discussion.
>> >>
>> >> Cheers
>> >>
>> >> Nicolas
>> >>
>>
>
[Attachment #3 (text/html)]
<div dir="auto">Involvement not evolvement.</div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div \
dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Thu, 19 Jan 2023, 10:06 pm Justin Zobel, <<a \
href="mailto:justin.zobel@gmail.com">justin.zobel@gmail.com</a>> \
wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 \
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto">In the regard then \
it falls to developers with the understanding of the codebase to triage these.<div \
dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">However it's clear due to the age of these \
bugs that most developers don't have time or aren't prioritising these \
reports.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">This is why I've \
volunteered time to try get engagement happening with community (the bug reporters) \
to help confirm these issues still exist and if they do, try and encourage evolvement \
from the project maintainers.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div \
dir="auto">Regards,</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div \
dir="auto">Justin</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" \
class="gmail_attr">On Thu, 19 Jan 2023, 9:56 pm Nicolas Fella, <<a \
href="mailto:nicolas.fella@gmx.de" target="_blank" \
rel="noreferrer">nicolas.fella@gmx.de</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote \
class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc \
solid;padding-left:1ex">Hi,<br> <br>
Am 19.01.23 um 04:04 schrieb Justin:<br>
> Hi Nicolas,<br>
><br>
> This has been discussed with Nate Graham directly who has approved<br>
> this cleanup of Bugzilla including the messaging behind it.<br>
<br>
KDE consists of more than Nate tough. We discuss and "review" things in<br>
the open.<br>
<br>
><br>
> I am happy to discuss any concerns that people have around this. I<br>
> understand Krita requested we exclude them from any gardening and that<br>
> has been done, however this is the only feedback I have received.<br>
><br>
> The gardening team aims to find out if the bug reports are still<br>
> relevant by involving the users who reported them in determining if<br>
> they are still valid. This increases community involvement and helps<br>
> KDE as there isn't anywhere near enough manpower to review the<br>
> thousands upon thousands of bugs that haven't been touched in years.<br>
<br>
Anecdotally many people don't like such automated changes being done to<br>
their bugreports that don't actually engage with the content of the report.<br>
<br>
><br>
> The bugs that we are interacting with are ones that have not had any<br>
> activity for over 2 years. We are simply trying to reinvigorate<br>
> discussion on those bugs to see if they are still valid. If the user<br>
> does not reply within the standard 30 day period after a bug is set to<br>
> NEEDSINFO, it is automatically closed by the Bug Janitor.<br>
><br>
> I am not simply closing bugs, so I do take offense that care is not<br>
> applied.<br>
<br>
Properly "triaging" old reports requires at least some level of<br>
understanding of the project, codebase etc. I'm afraid there is no<br>
simple solution to that and rule-based approaches aren't good enough.<br>
Even taking things like CONFIRMED status or wishlist priority into<br>
account assumes that these have actually been consistently applied.<br>
<br>
><br>
> I will halt it until it is approved by more developers. However if it<br>
> is decided that it isn't wanted then the KDE as a whole will need to<br>
> entice more people in sorting old bugs individually as it is clearly<br>
> not a priority right now for the majority.<br>
><br>
> Regards,<br>
><br>
> Justin<br>
><br>
Don't get me wrong, I do appreciate the initiative of cleaning up bugs.<br>
But we do need to handle this with a lot of care to avoid it backfiring.<br>
<br>
Cheers<br>
<br>
Nico<br>
<br>
<br>
> On 19/1/23 11:05, Nicolas Fella wrote:<br>
>> Hi,<br>
>><br>
>> can we please put the effort of "gardening" old bugreports on hold \
until<br> >> we figured out whether this is actually something we want to do? \
Several<br> >> people already expressed concerns about this.<br>
>><br>
>> Improperly applied such mass changes can do more harm than good. We may<br>
>> close bugreports that are actually still useful just because nobody<br>
>> replied on then in a relatively short timeframe.<br>
>><br>
>> Properly cleaning up old bugreports is important. However, it requires<br>
>> some level of care and expertise to judge whether a bugreport is still<br>
>> useful. Judging by the volume of bugreports that is pinged with the same<br>
>> copy&paste message this care is not applied here.<br>
>><br>
>> At minimum such initiatives should be announced and discussed before<br>
>> doing them, to allow people to give their input on the proposal. I am<br>
>> not aware of any such announcement/discussion.<br>
>><br>
>> Cheers<br>
>><br>
>> Nicolas<br>
>><br>
</blockquote></div>
</blockquote></div>
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
Configure |
About |
News |
Add a list |
Sponsored by KoreLogic