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

[Ian Walls]

Anything that's Failed QA may still be in the process of being developed.
I'd recommend trying to reinvigorate the conversation in the comments before
marking such as abandoned.

I see no problem with leaving enhancement requests open, so long as they
still apply.  There are enhancements I was looking at years ago that are
still not available, and would still be applicable.

For my part, the list I'm concerned with is the "Signed Off" list.  For
those doing the signing off, the "Needs Signoff" makes a good starting
place.  And for everyone else writing patches, usually we're doing them to
fix a specific issue in front of us (if you're scanning through the bugs
list to find issues to squash, I commend you!).  Being able to try a bit of
work to an existing bug report may be easier than filing a new one, provided
you can find it.  That's made easier by leaving old reports open, even if
there hasn't been active on them recently.


-Ian

On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 12:46 PM, MJ Ray <mjr at phonecoop.coop> wrote:

> 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
> _______________________________________________
> Koha-devel mailing list
> Koha-devel at lists.koha-community.org
> http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel
> website : http://www.koha-community.org/
> git : http://git.koha-community.org/
> bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/
>



-- 
Ian Walls
Lead Development Specialist
ByWater Solutions
Phone # (888) 900-8944
http://bywatersolutions.com
ian.walls at bywatersolutions.com
Twitter: @sekjal
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </pipermail/koha-devel/attachments/20111024/be67db04/attachment.htm>