Thank you, Christoph!
It was surprising to learn that Platform is not under-resourced. For
example, looking into the E4 story, that is abandoned for years.
The E4 story is "another" story. All people that worked on it moved on and current committers don't have much (if any) interest in continuing it. But the same could be said for other things e.g. for pde-build.
Or, more closely to our topic, during our discussion regarding "should
we close bugs automatically or just leave them open forever, because
there is no ability to reasonably process them".
Does this look like a project that is OK-resourced?
In the past we had one major and two service releases per year, that was
a kind of guarantee that the most wanted bugs will be fixed each year.
Now we have four releases per year, but in practice none of them are
dedicated to fix bugs.
I fully agree with Christoph that 20XX-12 release should be fully
dedicated to bugfix activities.
And this will align well with the practice of last decades where we had
service releases after the big release in summer.
Some of us do only releng, bug fixes, CVE fixes and dependency updates for years already so that would make no difference to this group.
I welcome and support every effort in that direction. We can not tell any committer what to work on so it's a matter of convincing more people to think that bug fixes and triaging are more important.
Even more important in my opinion is to streamline our codebase and actively remove duplicate/triplicate/quadruplicate functionality and API - that would make it easier to get new people in and even enhance support and user satisfaction. If I have to start with do you use action and command for XYZ and following up with several similar questions the usual result is either I lose track due to more pressing issues or the submitter just gives up. This is the biggest burden for me - it really prevents me from effective working, maybe I'm just badly organized and can't concentrate, who knows.
Regards,
AF
2/18/2022 9:13 AM, Christoph Läubrich пишет:
> > Auto-closing is more likely to stimulate people in
> > trying to contribute [...] Sometimes they reopen
> > with frustration and this can trigger a new conversation with some
> > committers to help them in contributing more.
>
> I'm not sure if you suggest here to
>
> a) frustrate users more 'stimulate' them
> -or-
> b) user should rant more to get more attention and 'stimulate'
> contributors
>
> ;-)
>
> > It just make the
> > project seem dead.
>
> Auto-closing also make the project seem dead as it clearly indicates
> that there is no resources or people just don't care to handle valid
> reports.
>
> I'd better have a growing number of issues showing that we need more
> resources than a constant number of issues that gives the false
> impression there is no problem.
>
> In the end, its just a matter of what we want to deliver 'more' or
> 'better' software. As mentioned before, it might be good to have one
> of the releases per year that is dedicated to bug fixing (and maybe
> bug triage) where we simply do not accept new features. For example
> the 20xx-12 release as its is a bit shorter and we can have a fresh
> start for the new year.
>
>
> Am 17.02.22 um 21:12 schrieb Mickael Istria:
>> > We all know that the root cause of this discussion is the 10+
>> years of
>> under-resourcing for Eclipse platform.
>>
>> Eclipse Platform is not under-resourced. It's OK-resourced, and just
>> like any project would benefit from more resources, but let's move
>> the resources discussion away and focus on the community aspects of
>> auto-closing bugs.
>>
>> > Do we expect big players to come back and sponsor teams of
>> developers again as it was in 00ths? I doubt so. Perhaps, small
>> companies and individuals from the community are the only hope.
>>
>> I don't get how it's related to the discussion about auto-closing
>> bugs or not. And I also don't get how Alex's answer triggered that
>> question.
>>
>> And if yes, how auto-close could help to recruit new resources for
>> triaging (not even dreaming about bug fixing) from the community?
>>
>>
>> Auto-closing is more likely to stimulate people in trying to
>> contribute than just keeping the bug silent. At least, people can
>> decide to reopen with more details, or to add other information (not
>> useful anymore, was fixed), and that's a form of contribution
>> already. Sometimes they reopen with frustration and this can trigger
>> a new conversation with some committers to help them in contributing
>> more.
>> On the other hand, keeping the bugs open but silent brings no
>> interaction and thus no new opportunity to recruit. It just make the
>> project seem dead.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> platform-dev mailing list
>> platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> To unsubscribe from this list, visit
>> https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/platform-dev
> _______________________________________________
> platform-dev mailing list
> platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> To unsubscribe from this list, visit
> https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/platform-dev
>
_______________________________________________
platform-dev mailing list
platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/platform-dev
