Involvement not evolvement. On Thu, 19 Jan 2023, 10:06 pm Justin Zobel, <justin.zo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> In the regard then it falls to developers with the understanding of the > codebase to triage these. > > However it's clear due to the age of these bugs that most developers don't > have time or aren't prioritising these reports. > > This is why I've volunteered time to try get engagement happening with > community (the bug reporters) to help confirm these issues still exist and > if they do, try and encourage evolvement from the project maintainers. > > Regards, > > Justin > > On Thu, 19 Jan 2023, 9:56 pm Nicolas Fella, <nicolas.fe...@gmx.de> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Am 19.01.23 um 04:04 schrieb Justin: >> > Hi Nicolas, >> > >> > This has been discussed with Nate Graham directly who has approved >> > this cleanup of Bugzilla including the messaging behind it. >> >> KDE consists of more than Nate tough. We discuss and "review" things in >> the open. >> >> > >> > I am happy to discuss any concerns that people have around this. I >> > understand Krita requested we exclude them from any gardening and that >> > has been done, however this is the only feedback I have received. >> > >> > The gardening team aims to find out if the bug reports are still >> > relevant by involving the users who reported them in determining if >> > they are still valid. This increases community involvement and helps >> > KDE as there isn't anywhere near enough manpower to review the >> > thousands upon thousands of bugs that haven't been touched in years. >> >> Anecdotally many people don't like such automated changes being done to >> their bugreports that don't actually engage with the content of the >> report. >> >> > >> > The bugs that we are interacting with are ones that have not had any >> > activity for over 2 years. We are simply trying to reinvigorate >> > discussion on those bugs to see if they are still valid. If the user >> > does not reply within the standard 30 day period after a bug is set to >> > NEEDSINFO, it is automatically closed by the Bug Janitor. >> > >> > I am not simply closing bugs, so I do take offense that care is not >> > applied. >> >> Properly "triaging" old reports requires at least some level of >> understanding of the project, codebase etc. I'm afraid there is no >> simple solution to that and rule-based approaches aren't good enough. >> Even taking things like CONFIRMED status or wishlist priority into >> account assumes that these have actually been consistently applied. >> >> > >> > I will halt it until it is approved by more developers. However if it >> > is decided that it isn't wanted then the KDE as a whole will need to >> > entice more people in sorting old bugs individually as it is clearly >> > not a priority right now for the majority. >> > >> > Regards, >> > >> > Justin >> > >> Don't get me wrong, I do appreciate the initiative of cleaning up bugs. >> But we do need to handle this with a lot of care to avoid it backfiring. >> >> Cheers >> >> Nico >> >> >> > On 19/1/23 11:05, Nicolas Fella wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> >> >> can we please put the effort of "gardening" old bugreports on hold >> until >> >> we figured out whether this is actually something we want to do? >> Several >> >> people already expressed concerns about this. >> >> >> >> Improperly applied such mass changes can do more harm than good. We may >> >> close bugreports that are actually still useful just because nobody >> >> replied on then in a relatively short timeframe. >> >> >> >> Properly cleaning up old bugreports is important. However, it requires >> >> some level of care and expertise to judge whether a bugreport is still >> >> useful. Judging by the volume of bugreports that is pinged with the >> same >> >> copy&paste message this care is not applied here. >> >> >> >> At minimum such initiatives should be announced and discussed before >> >> doing them, to allow people to give their input on the proposal. I am >> >> not aware of any such announcement/discussion. >> >> >> >> Cheers >> >> >> >> Nicolas >> >> >> >
