Re: 4K Bugs

[Alexis <flexibeast@gmail.com>]

Richard Copley <rcopley@gmail.com> writes:

>> An argument could be made that the longest-outstanding issues 
>> should be displayed first, to try to encourage their 
>> resolution. Having said that, it could also be argued that 
>> their longevity means they're less likely to be able to be 
>> resolved soon than recent bugs. So i'm not sure what the best 
>> default is here.
>
> This problem will go away by itself now that we're deluged with 
> enthusiastic triagers.

Heh, well, i wouldn't call the (from what i can tell) 
maybe-less-than-half-a-dozen of us to be a "deluge". :-)

At any rate, i'm not sure the problem will necessarily go away by 
itself, for a few reasons:

* Looking over the longest-outstanding bugs, i noticed a number of 
  them 
  were Mac-specific. As i don't have access to a Mac - i'm on 
  Debian - i can't try to reproduce the issue. So unless triagers 
  have access to a Mac, such issues are more likely to 
  languish. (This had made me wonder whether tags like 'mac', 
  'win' etc. might be useful?)

* Even triagers who do have access to a Mac won't necessarily feel 
  competent enough to try to address /every/ long-outstanding bug; 
  and this applies more generally, regardless of OS. i've been 
  following bug-gnu-emacs for a while now, to try to help triage 
  new bugs, but i only address a small fraction of those that come 
  through: those haven't been addressed by someone more expert 
  than me, and which i understand well enough to be able to try to 
  reproduce and/or ask (hopefully) sensible questions about.

* Some of the long-outstanding bugs have a complicated history 
  that is 
  daunting to try to untangle and work out what the next step 
  might be. Particularly when the history involves a heated debate 
  which has apparently reached an uncomfortable stalemate.

Regarding the last point: maybe at least some of these sorts of 
bugs could be brought to John's attention for arbitration?


Alexis.