From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90B2A138247 for ; Thu, 16 Jan 2014 18:11:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D5D4BE0BF4; Thu, 16 Jan 2014 18:11:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from foo.stuge.se (foo.stuge.se [212.116.89.98]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9467BE0B94 for ; Thu, 16 Jan 2014 18:11:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 24752 invoked by uid 501); 16 Jan 2014 18:11:30 -0000 Message-ID: <20140116181130.24751.qmail@stuge.se> Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 19:11:30 +0100 From: Peter Stuge To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: revisiting our stabilization policy Mail-Followup-To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org References: <20140114213719.GA2684@laptop.home> <20140115004928.1fae6bf9@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <52D673A4.2080508@gentoo.org> <20140115180405.1cd06453@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <52D77A35.8080509@gentoo.org> <20140116155407.13492.qmail@stuge.se> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: X-Archives-Salt: f79c0c4f-ce6e-4224-81c5-d1a94da0d5ce X-Archives-Hash: 43a63b306cb1edd347bcb48784d3d614 Rich Freeman wrote: > >> As i said earlier, problem begins when we NEED to stabilize > >> something to prevent breakages and arch teams are slow. > > > > Isn't that simply a matter of assigning and respecting priority on > > bugs properly? > > Are you suggesting that we should forbid people from working on > lower-priority bugs anytime a higher-priority bug exists? No, of course not forbid. I admit it's naïve but I can't believe that it would be neccessary. I expect anyone with the slightest sense of responsibility to solve problems in order of priority. Individuals may have different priorities than Gentoo as a whole and that is and must be fine, but in that case Gentoo's high priority problems stay unsolved, and I do not at all think that it's catastrophical to have unfixed high priority problems. > You can't force anybody to work on the higher-priority ones. Yes, you can't force anybody to do anything unless you motivate them, usually with money. The state of Gentoo always did and always will equal the sum of contributors' work. > Bottom line is that people work on what they work on. Unless you can > find people to work on the stuff that you want done you need to make > work go away. I certainly don't think the work needs to go away if the work is considered to be important. It's fine to have open bugs for years in the absence of a good solution. Things happen when they happen. If someone cares then they fix and ideally it is so easy for them to contribute the fix that they will. If noone cares then bugs stay unfixed and then the bugs don't matter. ;) //Peter