Backwards development

[Gervase Markham]

On 20/11/15 21:29, mva at sysfault.org wrote:
> It does not feel like that. Start to eat your own dog food :-). Use a
> stock Bugzilla for tracking Bugzilla bugs instead of BMO - right now
> the pressure on the project itself for its own needs is low, since
> it benefits from things (BMO) that are not merged into it.

I can see some advantages to doing that; but I can also see a lot of
work and migration effort. Given that we do not have a great level of
resources, we would have to be certain it was worth it.

> How about not closing bugs and feature requests as duplicates,
> referring to other bugs being more that 4 or 5 years old (with the
> last comment being equally old)? This neither leaves a good
> impression nor motivates others to participate even more. 

I'm not sure what alternative you are suggesting. Are you saying we
should leave open multiple bugs covering the same problem?

The point of marking a bug as a duplicate of another is that the
reporter can then see all of the information pertaining to the problem,
including what other people have thought about it.

Leaving the new bug open would not make anyone more likely to work on
the problem in question.

> Finally, push small changes and features into Bugzilla, even if they
> only deal with a minor bit of a bigger solution. 

If you have outstanding patches where you have requested a review and
aren't getting one, please let me know.

> My impression right
> now is that lots of things are hold back to aim for a "generic,
> one-size-fits-all" approach. Although that's appealing, it will delay
> features and is not a motivator for contributors.

I agree that historically this balance has sometimes been in the wrong
place.

Gerv

_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla