Terry: Thanks for bringing this to notice. Mark: Kudos for your effort in cleaning up bugs.python.org
On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 10:16 PM, Mark Lawrence <breamore...@yahoo.co.uk>wrote: > On 19/06/2010 03:37, Terry Reedy wrote: > >> Go to the bottom of >> http://bugs.python.org/iss...@template=search&status=1 >> enter 1 in the Message Count box and hit Search. >> >> At the moment, this gets 510 hits. Some have had headers updated, nearly >> half have had a person add himself as 'nosy' (put 1 in the Nosy count >> box to count those that have not), but none have a written response. >> >> In the past two weeks, I have commented on some old orphans and gotten a >> couple of previously orphaned patches applied and the issue closed. But >> I am not prepared to spend my whole life on this ;=). >> >> We need more issue reviewers. >> Clearly. >> If you want to contibute, opportunity is here. >> With 500 orphans, and 2200 other open issues, >> there must be something that matches your interests and abilities. >> Use other search fields to narrow the choices. >> >> If you want to contibute to the tracker, this may help: >> http://wiki.python.org/moin/TrackerDocs/ >> Then read examples of comments already there. >> >> Or consider my first-response comment to >> http://bugs.python.org/issue8990 >> >> To write that, I >> >> * verified the reported behavior, though I forgot to explicitly say so; >> when doing so, include version and system (such as 3.1.2, WinXP), as >> that is sometimes helpful. >> >> * read the relevant doc section and pasted it in to establish a basis >> for discussion (the OP might have done that, but did not, so I did). >> >> Everyone reading this should at least be able to do this much for an >> issue like this, and this much *is* helpful. >> >> * compared behavior and doc and concluded that there is a bug. >> >> * read the posted patch as best I could, which is not much in this case, >> but it at least looked like a real diff file. >> >> * noticed that the diff did *not* patch the appropriate unit test file. >> >> * discussed two possible fixes and identified which the OP choose. >> >> * wrote an 'executive summary' both for the OP and future reviewers. >> >> Oh yes, I also adjusted the headers. Although new reviewers cannot do >> that, you *can* suggest in the message what changes to make. >> >> Special offer to readers of this thread, especially new reviewers: >> if you make such a suggestion, you may email me, subject: Tracker, with >> one clickable link like the above, cut and pasted from the browser URL >> box, per line of the message. >> >> Perhaps you are shy and uncomfortable saying much. Well so was I. I >> started about 5 years ago with *safe* comments and have s l o w l y >> expanded my comfort zone. The shock of discovering this week that there >> are 500 orphans, some 2 years old, expanded it. After no response for a >> year or two, even an imperfect response must be better than nothing. >> >> While there is occasional negativity on the tracker, I believe it >> averages less per message than python-list, which itself is pretty decent. >> >> Terry Jan Reedy >> >> > Ok, but I'm going for EAFP rather than LBYL. I have written a will. :) > > Kindest regards. > > Mark Lawrence. > > > -- > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list >
-- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
