March 1, 2004
Attinasi was right
This needs to stop.
Posted by bzbarsky at March 1, 2004 9:35 PM
Flood of new bugs, comments, requests for reviews etc.
While I agree, that the "Flood of new bugs and comments" is a mess and getting worse.
Isn't it POSITIVE that there are more Requests for Reviews? Wouldn't this translate into "more work" being done on Mozilla/Gecko and more people contributing?
People like Daniel Glazman struggle to get reviews done that are needed for products like NVU (composer ++), Sunbird, Fx, TB, Seamonkey, but it seems to be a mess just to try and find someone with time to do this.
"This has got to stop"
Any suggestions on how this should happen?
> Isn't it POSITIVE that there are more Requests for
Matter of perspective.
> Any suggestions on how this should happen?
At the moment, I'm taking the steps listed in the previous entry. If that's not sufficient, I'll take more drastic steps.
"Flood of new bugs" you could "lock" bugzilla for normal people, ok that sounds rather drastic and i also don't know if this should even be considered. But the problem is just as easy: Too many users (and userbase growing to much) and too few QA and developers. I think we just can't handle this anymore. But every open source project has just the same problems :/ (also the problems may not be so drastic as found at mozilla.org)
Boris: Thanks for the reply.
I guess I just find it confusing.
Mozilla.org preaches that it NEEDS more contributors, Q/A, testers, etc.
(see: http://gemal.dk/archives/000476.html as a not-so-good example).
And yet, when it does happen, no one likes it either. Please don't take me wrong, maybe I'm seeing this from the wrong perspective, as in, I don't understand how "more Request for reviews could be negative to mozilla.org". I'm honestly interested in knowing why, as an outsider, this doesn't make sense.
Also, how do your resolutions help? Maybe I don't understand correctly, but it looks like you are putting reviewing a the back-burner?
Do you mean this is all bad for mozilla in general, or for you own personal goals?
Thanks for any clarification, and sorry if I am totally lost.
Jed, it's very simple. I don't speak for Mozilla.org. I speak for myself (this is my personal weblog, after all).
And no, I am not putting reviews on the back burner. I will continue to spend about twice as much time on reviews as I do on actually coding (as I have for months now).
When I grow up, I wanna be like bz!
/me figures in, um, two or three more years he can do half of what bz does for moz
Thanks for clearing that up.
I greatly appreciate your feedback.
Boris things could be worse, Marc was for a time the layout default bug assignee.... Chris was it too for half a year and it took over a year to send the crap out to the right components/owners. Regardless how annoying the bugs are they are a great capital. KHTML has as many bugs as layout-tables (iirc). I believe that mozilla needs to improve the handling of this incoming flow by seeking volunteers that take over the responsibilities that previously QA engineers at netscape had and make for instance core.layout.tables@bugs again a real person / or a real group of volunteers. This would shift the responsibilities back in a way that people, who are able to code, do the coding. The positive side effect of concrete responsibility is: these people will sooner or later start to fix them. This will of course increase your review load ;-).
If Boris could spend his time coding/reviewing and NOT dealing with testcases/triaging, I think his problem would be solved. But layout QA is hard, and requires people of a technical level that would rather hack on something else. I don't know how much I could do of layout QA at a time unless I was getting paid to do it