From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Bug statistics Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2010 10:18:29 +0900 Message-ID: <87sk4amw0q.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> References: <1focf1eb1p.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <201006241959.12567.tassilo@member.fsf.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1277515352 28057 80.91.229.12 (26 Jun 2010 01:22:32 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2010 01:22:32 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Tassilo Horn , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: rms@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Jun 26 03:22:29 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OSK6H-0001hr-92 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 26 Jun 2010 03:22:29 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33858 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OSK6G-0001qg-JS for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 25 Jun 2010 21:22:28 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=35826 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OSK6A-0001qb-Dv for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 25 Jun 2010 21:22:23 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OSK69-0005aB-9w for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 25 Jun 2010 21:22:22 -0400 Original-Received: from mtps01.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp ([130.158.97.223]:59108) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OSK68-0005Zn-WA; Fri, 25 Jun 2010 21:22:21 -0400 Original-Received: from uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp [130.158.99.156]) by mtps01.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 210F21535A8; Sat, 26 Jun 2010 10:22:18 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: by uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 9239612136B; Sat, 26 Jun 2010 10:18:29 +0900 (JST) In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: VM 8.0.12-devo-585 under 21.5 (beta29) "garbanzo" a03421eb562b XEmacs Lucid (x86_64-unknown-linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:126415 Archived-At: Richard Stallman writes: > However, duplicates would not be a problem if we > had a small number of open bug reports. We would see > them and close them when we close the others that they match. No, people frequently report duplicates of closed bugs too, and this is more likely if the normal search doesn't report closed bugs. Fixing bugs quickly doesn't prevent duplicates, and perhaps more important, a regression will appear to the bug tracker as a duplicate. You really want automatic dupe-finding capability in your bug tracker. > I think the problem is not enough effort to fix bugs. Easily said, but you can't provide that effort yourself, nor can Stefan et al, not for more than a short spurt. What you could do is revisit decisions to impose inappropriate infrastructure on the project, inappropriate in the sense that it's clearly inconveniencing the "long tail" of users who are devoting small amounts of time (from 0 to a few tens of minutes a week) to Emacs, and therefore could easily double the amount of effort they grant Emacs. This is especially important for bug triage, which is boring, unpleasant work with few intrinsic rewards at best.