Paul Poulain wrote: [...]
* i'll also investigate ENH that are "failed QA" and either bump them to 3.8 or close the bug as "abandonned" if it seems it's abandonned. Of course, the author will always be welcomed to reopen it and submit an acceptable patch. I'll decide looking at the age of the patch, how far is it to be acceptable, how active is the patch original author, how interesting is it to have this ENH.
I feel that just closing the bug as abandoned without further action is almost always going to be the wrong thing to do, no matter what the severity. For example, just this weekend, I came across bug 6142 that appeared to have been abandoned by biblibre workers, but was a simple task to clean up and sign off. I think the above policy will result in losing a lot of viable code. What do other wranglers think? Also, does QAM like this idea?
* looking at all ENH, I see there are 920 that are open. A large part of them have had no activity for more than 1 year. A few of them maybe good ideas, but they are not sponsored. I do the following proposition : "i'll close all ENH bugs that are not sponsored and have had no activity for more than nine months. For sponsored entries that have more than 9 months, i'll add a comment to ask wether we should wait for a patch or close the bug". If you disagree, please argue. If it's OK, I'll add this rule to the wiki.
ENH bugs in the needs-sponsor state probably have willing developers attached. I think it would be good to first post a list to koha@lists whether any libraries are interested in sponsoring and give them some time to respond. I'll do that in a moment. Hope that helps, -- MJ Ray (slef), member of www.software.coop, a for-more-than-profit co-op. http://koha-community.org supporter, web and LMS developer, statistician. In My Opinion Only: see http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html Available for hire for Koha work http://www.software.coop/products/koha