Am 10.07.2014 01:10, schrieb Cédric Krier:
> On 07 Jun 13:59, Udo Spallek wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Fri, 06 Jun 2014 19:27:44 +0200
>> Sergi Almacellas Abellana <[email protected]>:
>>> I have seen in other open source projects that they mark easy issues
>>> in order to ease the introduction of newcomers to the project
>>> development, for example [1].
>>> I wonder if this will be a good idea for the tryton community. Do you
>>> think this will be helpful?
>>> In order to make this happen, this are the required tasks to do:
>>> - Add some type of mechanism in roundup to mark easy tasks.
>> We could use Roundup Keywords.

This all is good, but I want to share my concerns with the current
process (it's more a question than a proposition):

since I always developing on the last release it's always a little bit
hard for me to contribute:

I detect a bug or think about a possible improvement. Then I edit the
involved part of the default modules (if it looks to me like a bug) or
overwrite a method of the core modules (if I think it could be an
improvement). After I continue with my projects - checking if the
changes are solving my problem or it is only wrong designed approach in
my modules. Now I decide that it could be a contribution. Next I have to
check out or update the trunk. Now i need to merge my changes to trunk,
create an issue, create a code review, create a patch - this is a lot of
work which interrupts the work I just focused in. Because I don't do it
very often I need to read the contribution guideline each time (possible
alzheimer, but anyway)

I don't know if there is a way to simplify this - but making
contributions on last release would make some steps obsolete. I know
that having all tools handy for a core developer is state of art - but a
implementer of projects not always knows all the stuff he needs for
contribution. So we possibly loose a lot of input because potential
contributors decide to use a custom method in here modules to avoid the
noise a contribution could cause. While I'm writing this, a community
role like quality manager would be nice: I make my contribution -
community go to discuss the improvement and a person with all the tools
handy will check in the result in the right manner to trunk. I know that
this is more work for somebody but it could  lower barriers for people,
which is more involved in professional implementation than in "hard core
coding".

I don't know, if I'm the only one who has this view  - but I think it
could be discussed, at least at the Unconference.

Jan

Reply via email to