From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Christian Bryant Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Unanswered Emacs Problem Reports 40+ Months Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2013 12:03:42 -0700 Message-ID: <526AC08E.3050907@gnulinuxlibre.org> References: <52689833.7060109@gnulinuxlibre.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1382727851 9313 80.91.229.3 (25 Oct 2013 19:04:11 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2013 19:04:11 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Glenn Morris , Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Oct 25 21:04:15 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1VZmgA-0004NQ-LL for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 25 Oct 2013 21:04:14 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:60479 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VZmg9-00080D-RP for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 25 Oct 2013 15:04:13 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:37702) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VZmfz-0007z5-GR for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 25 Oct 2013 15:04:11 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VZmfr-0003cb-8s for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 25 Oct 2013 15:04:03 -0400 Original-Received: from relay4-d.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.183.196]:52959) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VZmfr-0003cW-2v; Fri, 25 Oct 2013 15:03:55 -0400 Original-Received: from mfilter14-d.gandi.net (mfilter14-d.gandi.net [217.70.178.142]) by relay4-d.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B6BE172085; Fri, 25 Oct 2013 21:03:53 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mfilter14-d.gandi.net Original-Received: from relay4-d.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.183.196]) by mfilter14-d.gandi.net (mfilter14-d.gandi.net [10.0.15.180]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ormQP8-Y3BKl; Fri, 25 Oct 2013 21:03:51 +0200 (CEST) X-Originating-IP: 149.142.243.162 Original-Received: from [10.2.228.221] (unknown [149.142.243.162]) (Authenticated sender: christian@gnulinuxlibre.org) by relay4-d.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BF6E1172094; Fri, 25 Oct 2013 21:03:50 +0200 (CEST) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.0.1 In-Reply-To: X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 217.70.183.196 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:164544 Archived-At: On 10/25/2013 11:47 AM, Glenn Morris wrote: > I imagine most responses will be of two kinds: > > 1) No reply. Then what? Considering the bugs I will start with are the oldest there, "no reply" to these bugs will simply produce a note in the bug that a request for an update was made. Better than nothing, I think. > 2) A slightly annoyed "yes, of course my wishlist/doc bug/whatever" > still applies, didn't you read it/test it/try my patch?". > > The useful replies I expect to be a small minority ("It was fixed in > 24.1", "I misunderstood and this is not actually a bug", etc.) I will shoot a handy report every 50-100 bugs over to Stefan with those who answered with a slightly annoyed "yes". Taking those in chunks and having new Emacs team members whittle them down is both useful for them to better learn Emacs, and to users who will see that bug maintenance does eventually happen. > So I expect the result will be mostly be to annoy the bug reporters I'm open to recommendations for the least annoying verbiage :-) > I'm not optimistic that an automatic process can tell us much, but I > guess we'll see. I've performed tasks like this many times at work, for the same reasons: I saw a report where a specific application or library not only dominated the bug report, but had the oldest bugs, too. Maybe a year from now, or two or three years from now, some other application can take that honor. Cheers! - CB