[Koha-devel] Koha 3.6 is out, starting Koha 3.8 !

[MJ Ray]

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 at 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