Re: Bugs *NOT* being closed faster than filed: Re: Wishlist for woody+1
On Wed, 29 May 2002, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Tue, May 28, 2002 at 04:29:00PM -0500, Adam Heath wrote:
> > > Your graph would indicate that we passed 100,000 bugs in the archive in
> > > early March when we haven't done that yet.
> > I'll look closer. I do stand by the total bug count, except for it being
> > shifted.
>
> ] 200206240100, 121289, 231, 121286, 0
>
> Adam, by your numbers we have precisely three open bugs at the
> moment. It's blatantly incorrect, not something you should be standing by.
Well, I rewrote the code. It's much easier to follow.
I also found the bug that was making it take 1.25 to 1.5 hours to scan. It
now only takes 15 minutes to scan.
When I developed the first version, I did it without thinking it thru, and did
it late at night, which also affected the program. I also tried doing too
much in one block of code. All these ended up skewing the numbers.
The new version has separate, descreet blocks of code, that only do one thing
at a time(count_by_date, do_sort, sum, etc). This makes it much easier to
follow.
Anyways, the new graph is up at the same place:
http://bugs.debian.org/~doogie/open-archived.png
This bug shows that we definately do have more bugs being filed than bugs
being closed.
The dips you see at the beginning of the total bugs line, is, I believe due to
no bugs being archived that day(the archive script may not have run). I
haven't investigated this much, tho.
Also, does anyone have an explanation as to why we suddenly have a lot more
bugs being filed?
In summary, let's start fixing bugs. Do we really have to wait for woody to
release, to upload fixes to sid?
The goal, when looking at this graph, is to get the 'delta active/open' line
to be zero, and then to make it negative. If this line is below zero, it
means bugs are being closed faster than they are opened. So, let's get to
work!
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: