On Tue, May 24, 2005 at 01:46:43AM +0300, Cesar Martinez Izquierdo wrote: > El Martes 24 Mayo 2005 01:42, Cesar Martinez Izquierdo escribió: > > El Martes 24 Mayo 2005 01:27, Thomas Bushnell BSG escribió: > > > Cesar Martinez Izquierdo <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes: > > > > For example, the maintainer asked for more info, the user submitted the > > > > requested info, and then there was no activity in the BTS for a year. > > > > > > What exactly do you want the maintainer to do in this case? > > > > To solve the bug? > > Clarifying the sentence: > > IMHO, after a year, the bug should have been fixed, otherwise it should be > tagged "help", and ideally the maintainer should write a short explanation > about why he is unable to fix the bug (so that other people can really help > him). > > Cesar Hi Dev folks, Just a thought. How about setting up an aging system for who can fix the bugs. Give the maintainer N time period to act on the bug and then if the maintainer can not fix it or will not fix it, other folks who have a patch should be able to apply to fix it. if the maintainer feels that the patch should not be applyed, there should some authority to hear the pros and cons of the issue and arbitrate the result--would that be the tech commity, app. manag., RM or ? It seems that folks go MIA for legitimate reasons but the package suffers. it seems like allowing someone to come in to fix a package or takeover a packages has to deal with the ego of the maintainer. Folks should be able to let a person who is currently not otherwise involved, take over a package for as long as someone is MIA and if the person say that they want to take it back, then they can ask or maybe suggest that they co-maintain, as both persons should allowed to work on something that they have a passion for. I think that there should be something in the DEV REF that says that the maintaince of a PACKAGE should be #1 and that all maintainers should encouraged to work on any package of an (percieved) MIA programmer. And that when the person is FOUND, that they can hand back the packages with no ego bruises because each person's goal should be the best software, not the fiefdom of a packages. Cheers, Kev -- counter.li.org #238656 -- goto counter.li.org and be counted! `$' $' $ $ _ ,d$$$g$ ,d$$$b. $,d$$$b`$' g$$$$$b $,d$$b ,$P' `$ ,$P' `Y$ $$' `$ $ "' `$ $$' `$ $$ $ $$ggggg$ $ $ $ ,$P"" $ $ $ `$g. ,$$ `$$._ _. $ _,g$P $ `$b. ,$$ $ $ `Y$$P'$. `Y$$$$P $$$P"' ,$. `Y$$P'$ $. ,$.
Description: Digital signature