On 06/14/2012 08:31 PM, Aaron J. Seigo wrote:
> On Thursday, June 14, 2012 16:58:55 David Edmundson wrote:
>> so much resistance. Reviews are slow,
> often they happen the same day, sometimes they don't. i would like them t=
o be
> faster as well. when i keep on top of them and do the reviewing myself, i=
t is
> fast. when i don't ... well ..
>
>> replies on maliing lists (such
>> as this one) can be very condescending instantly blaming an entire
>> team for a lack of communication and most ML threads seem to derail
>> into arguments.
> this has only been the case since a recent expansion of the project happe=
ned
> and new people joined in. this has not been the status quo for the last f=
ew
> years, and it is not enjoyable for anyone.
>
>> Have you discussed the weather LCD applet with the team before denying
>> the request.
> yes, on this very list. Lu=EDs Gabriel suggested a solution, as someone w=
ho is
> working on what may well be the next revision of the weather applet (done=
 this
> time with QML). i agreed that solution would work. it was then implied th=
at
> this was not acceptable, and we really should just do what the QA team sa=
ys.
> this is completely unnacceptable.
>
> as for decision making authority, in KDE that is the maintainer.
>
> the author of the weather dataengine is currently unavailable, and in lie=
u of
> them being here, then the maintainership falls on my shoulders.
>
> i also happen to be the module maintainer for the repository this compone=
nt is
> in.
>
> this is the standard way of doing things, and it works if people respect =
that.
> i find it disapointing that i need to somehow defend that i am allowed to=
 make
> decisions over code that i maintain.
>
Nobody said you had to do this or that. The QA team makes suggestions, =

you of course have the final say.
Thanks for fixing Calendar!

Again I apologize for the reverted commit (I CCed you so you were =

informed instantly), this had nothing to do with the current discussion =

and should not have been brought into it, it was just a bad handling of =

my part (which is not a behavior I usually have). It happens to make =

errors and we (quite enthusiastically) debugged this systray bug and I =

got carried away. Of course I'll use reviewboard next time. It had =

nothing to do with the QA Team and the debugging of the bug that lead to =

my bad revert happened in #plasma.

To add a positive note to all this: the work the QA Team did so far: I =

don't know how many Plasma bug reports were triaged prior the beta 1 =

release but Myriam alone triaged, verified, put versions in hundreds of =

reports. It's to be noted that users answered to queries about old bug =

reports better than we expected. From the beta 1 release to now, more =

than 100 bug reports were issued or confirmed, most about Plasma and 33 =

were fixed. Special thanks to Viranch who is tackling QML regressions =

and make users happy. Tests on community wiki =

http://community.kde.org/Getinvolved/Testing/Beta/Plasma can be useful =

to new developers.
Plasma bugs in bugzilla should now be very much easier for developers to =

prioritize. Please let us know if you have questions about bugzilla or =

suggestions.

Best regards,

Anne-Marie
_______________________________________________
Plasma-devel mailing list
Plasma-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel