On Sunday 19 January 2014 12:39:03 David Edmundson wrote: > On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 8:48 AM, Martin Graesslin <mgraess...@kde.org> wrote: > > Hi Christoph, > > > > during the Plasma sprint we discussed the bug situation and want to get > > your feedback on our ideas. In case there is a team mailing list please > > feel free to forward the mail. Our goal is to improve the situation with > > Plasma 2. We have to admit that we have failed with the current bugzilla > > situation and that we are probably not able to clean that up. > > > > One of the problems we identified is that we just get way too many bug > > reports to be able to handle. All bugs and all wishlist items end up in > > the product plasma. That's just too much. Our idea here is to focus, > > focus and focus. The Plasma team only dedicates itself to maintain the > > "essential" parts (to be defined, e.g. taskmanager, digital clock, > > launcher...) everything else (e.g. comic strip) should not end up in the > > product plasma but in a different product or in many products. This could > > depend on what the maintainers of the products want. > > > > With that change in place we should be able to reduce the number of > > incoming bug reports to a level that we could start caring. Our idea in > > that regard is that each of our essential components has a maintainer who > > looks into the bug reports. > > > > Another idea is also to reduce the number of incoming crashers. One thing > > we had seen in the past is that 3rd party applets easily crash the system > > (hello python). We don't care about those. We could implement this by a > > system like what Linux kernel uses: 3rd party module means the system is > > tainted and the crash report gets discarded. That might filter out some > > legit crashes, but those will be reported again. > > > > On the field of wishlist items we thought about not accepting any ideas > > for > > "new plasmoids" any more. We only care about the essential modules and > > thus > > are not interested in developing new non-essential plasmoids. So all > > incoming wishlist items for new plasmoids could be just closed with a > > standardized message. > > > > Last but not least we also had some ideas for the current situation. We > > don't think it's possible to ask the maintainers of essential modules to > > go through the Plasma 1 bugs and check whether they are still valid. > > Given the terrible state we would scare anybody away from becoming > > maintainer. So we need to improve that. One idea is to mass close > > everything which had been reported against a version before 4.11. 4.11 is > > our long-term release and everything else is unmaintained. This could > > cause some uncomfortable situations with our users but if we draft a well > > written message our users might be able to understand it. The second idea > > in that area is that we only care about the Plasmoids written in QML from > > the Plasma 1 times. > > I would prefer to consider it as; there are too many reports for us to > triage, so we will send the reporter message them a message asking > them to triage their own bug. They should test if it still applies in > the new Plasma and reopen on the new product accordingly. Till then we > will close it. > > In practice it amounts to the same thing, but it comes across better. Exactly my thoughts.
_______________________________________________ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
