Smalltalk › Pharo › Pharo Smalltalk Developers

[Issue tracker] *Please* look at your old reported issues!

‹ Previous Topic Next Topic ›
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
♦
♦
 17 messages Options
Marcus Denker-4
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
♦
♦
|

[Issue tracker] *Please* look at your old reported issues!

Marcus Denker-4
Hi,

We have 622 open issues. There are *a lot* of old issues that nobody will ever look at.
Please check those that *you* submitted to see what the status is!

If it is just “would be nice”, but not even on a level that you yourself are willing to even
send a mail to the mailing list to get people interested in helping you to push the case
forward, maybe you could think about closing the issue?

Maybe someone asked a question? If you submit an issue and there is a question not answered
for a month, we should close it: How important can it be? Why should *I* spend the time to fix
this issue if *you* are not even willing to answer a question in a minute?

It makes no sense to have lots and lots of issues that are not important even for the submitter.

Another thing is that issues get fixed, subsystems replaced, code removed… and the amazing thing
is that *never* the submitter of the original report closes it, even in these obvious cases.

The issue tracker is not a one way street!

        Marcus


philippeback
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
♦
♦
|

Re: [Issue tracker] *Please* look at your old reported issues!

philippeback
Most of the feedback is "won't fix" or "done in 4.x or 5.x"
All nice but hard to look at as day to day work is in 3.0

This effect will only get worse over time I guess.

On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 9:04 AM, Marcus Denker <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi,

We have 622 open issues. There are *a lot* of old issues that nobody will ever look at.
Please check those that *you* submitted to see what the status is!

If it is just “would be nice”, but not even on a level that you yourself are willing to even
send a mail to the mailing list to get people interested in helping you to push the case
forward, maybe you could think about closing the issue?

Maybe someone asked a question? If you submit an issue and there is a question not answered
for a month, we should close it: How important can it be? Why should *I* spend the time to fix
this issue if *you* are not even willing to answer a question in a minute?

It makes no sense to have lots and lots of issues that are not important even for the submitter.

Another thing is that issues get fixed, subsystems replaced, code removed… and the amazing thing
is that *never* the submitter of the original report closes it, even in these obvious cases.

The issue tracker is not a one way street!

        Marcus
Marcus Denker-4
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
♦
♦
|

Re: [Issue tracker] *Please* look at your old reported issues!

Marcus Denker-4
Yes, there is not enough man power, we maintain one version back. This means that
everything people backport to Pharo4 will be integrated. 



Most of the feedback is "won't fix" or "done in 4.x or 5.x"
All nice but hard to look at as day to day work is in 3.0

This effect will only get worse over time I guess.

On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 9:04 AM, Marcus Denker <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi,

We have 622 open issues. There are *a lot* of old issues that nobody will ever look at.
Please check those that *you* submitted to see what the status is!

If it is just “would be nice”, but not even on a level that you yourself are willing to even
send a mail to the mailing list to get people interested in helping you to push the case
forward, maybe you could think about closing the issue?

Maybe someone asked a question? If you submit an issue and there is a question not answered
for a month, we should close it: How important can it be? Why should *I* spend the time to fix
this issue if *you* are not even willing to answer a question in a minute?

It makes no sense to have lots and lots of issues that are not important even for the submitter.

Another thing is that issues get fixed, subsystems replaced, code removed… and the amazing thing
is that *never* the submitter of the original report closes it, even in these obvious cases.

The issue tracker is not a one way street!

        Marcus
Marcus Denker-4
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
♦
♦
|

Re: [Issue tracker] *Please* look at your old reported issues!

Marcus Denker-4

> On 30 Jul 2015, at 10:42, Marcus Denker <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Yes, there is not enough man power, we maintain one version back. This means that
> everything people backport to Pharo4 will be integrated.
>
>

With “indefinite” manpower this might be different, but even then you are in a lot of danger to
reach a point where “maintaining Pharo3” will turn into the same amount of change that is “Pharo4”.

Change is hard.

        Marcus


Sven Van Caekenberghe-2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
♦
♦
|

Re: [Issue tracker] *Please* look at your old reported issues!

Sven Van Caekenberghe-2
In reply to this post by philippeback

> On 30 Jul 2015, at 10:27, [hidden email] wrote:
>
> Most of the feedback is "won't fix" or "done in 4.x or 5.x"
> All nice but hard to look at as day to day work is in 3.0

You have to move, you are missing out on all the nice stuff !

Seriously, I understand that you stay at what you know because things are probably already complex enough, but really upgrading is often easier than you think.

> This effect will only get worse over time I guess.
>
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 9:04 AM, Marcus Denker <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We have 622 open issues. There are *a lot* of old issues that nobody will ever look at.
> Please check those that *you* submitted to see what the status is!
>
> If it is just “would be nice”, but not even on a level that you yourself are willing to even
> send a mail to the mailing list to get people interested in helping you to push the case
> forward, maybe you could think about closing the issue?
>
> Maybe someone asked a question? If you submit an issue and there is a question not answered
> for a month, we should close it: How important can it be? Why should *I* spend the time to fix
> this issue if *you* are not even willing to answer a question in a minute?
>
> It makes no sense to have lots and lots of issues that are not important even for the submitter.
>
> Another thing is that issues get fixed, subsystems replaced, code removed… and the amazing thing
> is that *never* the submitter of the original report closes it, even in these obvious cases.
>
> The issue tracker is not a one way street!
>
>         Marcus
>
>
>


philippeback
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
♦
♦
|

Re: [Issue tracker] *Please* look at your old reported issues!

philippeback
Not with the tons of configs I load and the fact that Roassal2 has been moving under my feet.

Phil

On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 11:07 AM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 30 Jul 2015, at 10:27, [hidden email] wrote:
>
> Most of the feedback is "won't fix" or "done in 4.x or 5.x"
> All nice but hard to look at as day to day work is in 3.0

You have to move, you are missing out on all the nice stuff !

Seriously, I understand that you stay at what you know because things are probably already complex enough, but really upgrading is often easier than you think.

> This effect will only get worse over time I guess.
>
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 9:04 AM, Marcus Denker <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We have 622 open issues. There are *a lot* of old issues that nobody will ever look at.
> Please check those that *you* submitted to see what the status is!
>
> If it is just “would be nice”, but not even on a level that you yourself are willing to even
> send a mail to the mailing list to get people interested in helping you to push the case
> forward, maybe you could think about closing the issue?
>
> Maybe someone asked a question? If you submit an issue and there is a question not answered
> for a month, we should close it: How important can it be? Why should *I* spend the time to fix
> this issue if *you* are not even willing to answer a question in a minute?
>
> It makes no sense to have lots and lots of issues that are not important even for the submitter.
>
> Another thing is that issues get fixed, subsystems replaced, code removed… and the amazing thing
> is that *never* the submitter of the original report closes it, even in these obvious cases.
>
> The issue tracker is not a one way street!
>
>         Marcus
>
>
>
philippeback
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
♦
♦
|

Re: [Issue tracker] *Please* look at your old reported issues!

philippeback
In reply to this post by Sven Van Caekenberghe-2
Adding to that: no incentive to move to 4.x or 5.x for that very project.

For my own stuff, this is a different story.

Phil

On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 11:07 AM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 30 Jul 2015, at 10:27, [hidden email] wrote:
>
> Most of the feedback is "won't fix" or "done in 4.x or 5.x"
> All nice but hard to look at as day to day work is in 3.0

You have to move, you are missing out on all the nice stuff !

Seriously, I understand that you stay at what you know because things are probably already complex enough, but really upgrading is often easier than you think.

> This effect will only get worse over time I guess.
>
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 9:04 AM, Marcus Denker <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We have 622 open issues. There are *a lot* of old issues that nobody will ever look at.
> Please check those that *you* submitted to see what the status is!
>
> If it is just “would be nice”, but not even on a level that you yourself are willing to even
> send a mail to the mailing list to get people interested in helping you to push the case
> forward, maybe you could think about closing the issue?
>
> Maybe someone asked a question? If you submit an issue and there is a question not answered
> for a month, we should close it: How important can it be? Why should *I* spend the time to fix
> this issue if *you* are not even willing to answer a question in a minute?
>
> It makes no sense to have lots and lots of issues that are not important even for the submitter.
>
> Another thing is that issues get fixed, subsystems replaced, code removed… and the amazing thing
> is that *never* the submitter of the original report closes it, even in these obvious cases.
>
> The issue tracker is not a one way street!
>
>         Marcus
>
>
>
Sean P. DeNigris
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
♦
♦
|

Re: [Issue tracker] *Please* look at your old reported issues!

Sean P. DeNigris
Administrator
In reply to this post by philippeback
philippeback wrote
Not with the tons of configs I load and the fact that Roassal2 has been
moving under my feet.
Does this prevent you even from upgrading to 4.0? I use 4.0 every day and have found it very stable.
Cheers,
Sean
abergel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
♦
♦
|

Re: [Issue tracker] *Please* look at your old reported issues!

abergel
In reply to this post by philippeback
Not with the tons of configs I load and the fact that Roassal2 has been moving under my feet.

But do you still stand ? :-)

Is everything okay with Roassal2 config?

Cheers,
Alexandre


On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 11:07 AM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 30 Jul 2015, at 10:27, [hidden email] wrote:
>
> Most of the feedback is "won't fix" or "done in 4.x or 5.x"
> All nice but hard to look at as day to day work is in 3.0

You have to move, you are missing out on all the nice stuff !

Seriously, I understand that you stay at what you know because things are probably already complex enough, but really upgrading is often easier than you think.

> This effect will only get worse over time I guess.
>
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 9:04 AM, Marcus Denker <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We have 622 open issues. There are *a lot* of old issues that nobody will ever look at.
> Please check those that *you* submitted to see what the status is!
>
> If it is just “would be nice”, but not even on a level that you yourself are willing to even
> send a mail to the mailing list to get people interested in helping you to push the case
> forward, maybe you could think about closing the issue?
>
> Maybe someone asked a question? If you submit an issue and there is a question not answered
> for a month, we should close it: How important can it be? Why should *I* spend the time to fix
> this issue if *you* are not even willing to answer a question in a minute?
>
> It makes no sense to have lots and lots of issues that are not important even for the submitter.
>
> Another thing is that issues get fixed, subsystems replaced, code removed… and the amazing thing
> is that *never* the submitter of the original report closes it, even in these obvious cases.
>
> The issue tracker is not a one way street!
>
>         Marcus
>
>
>
philippeback
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
♦
♦
|

Re: [Issue tracker] *Please* look at your old reported issues!

philippeback

I forked my own version at this point and load it via gitfiletree.

I'd have to merge some things back but as I have read that you will move away from trachel to bloc, well, all the html5/svg/js stuff will not work anymore, this may not make sense.

Phil

Le 30 juil. 2015 17:30, "Alexandre Bergel" <[hidden email]> a écrit :
Not with the tons of configs I load and the fact that Roassal2 has been moving under my feet.

But do you still stand ? :-)

Is everything okay with Roassal2 config?

Cheers,
Alexandre


On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 11:07 AM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 30 Jul 2015, at 10:27, [hidden email] wrote:
>
> Most of the feedback is "won't fix" or "done in 4.x or 5.x"
> All nice but hard to look at as day to day work is in 3.0

You have to move, you are missing out on all the nice stuff !

Seriously, I understand that you stay at what you know because things are probably already complex enough, but really upgrading is often easier than you think.

> This effect will only get worse over time I guess.
>
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 9:04 AM, Marcus Denker <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We have 622 open issues. There are *a lot* of old issues that nobody will ever look at.
> Please check those that *you* submitted to see what the status is!
>
> If it is just “would be nice”, but not even on a level that you yourself are willing to even
> send a mail to the mailing list to get people interested in helping you to push the case
> forward, maybe you could think about closing the issue?
>
> Maybe someone asked a question? If you submit an issue and there is a question not answered
> for a month, we should close it: How important can it be? Why should *I* spend the time to fix
> this issue if *you* are not even willing to answer a question in a minute?
>
> It makes no sense to have lots and lots of issues that are not important even for the submitter.
>
> Another thing is that issues get fixed, subsystems replaced, code removed… and the amazing thing
> is that *never* the submitter of the original report closes it, even in these obvious cases.
>
> The issue tracker is not a one way street!
>
>         Marcus
>
>
>
abergel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
♦
♦
|

Re: [Issue tracker] *Please* look at your old reported issues!

abergel
The html export is highly important. Moving to bloc will not move Roassal backward

Alexandre



> Le 30 juil. 2015 à 13:41, "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]> a écrit :
>
> I'd have to merge some things back but as I have read that you will move away from trachel to bloc, well, all the html5/svg/js stuff will not work anymore, this may not make sense

CyrilFerlicot
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
♦
♦
|

Re: [Issue tracker] *Please* look at your old reported issues!

CyrilFerlicot
In reply to this post by Marcus Denker-4
Le 30/07/2015 09:04, Marcus Denker a écrit :

> Hi,
>
> We have 622 open issues. There are *a lot* of old issues that nobody will ever look at.
> Please check those that *you* submitted to see what the status is!
>
> If it is just “would be nice”, but not even on a level that you yourself are willing to even
> send a mail to the mailing list to get people interested in helping you to push the case
> forward, maybe you could think about closing the issue?
>
> Maybe someone asked a question? If you submit an issue and there is a question not answered
> for a month, we should close it: How important can it be? Why should *I* spend the time to fix
> this issue if *you* are not even willing to answer a question in a minute?
>
> It makes no sense to have lots and lots of issues that are not important even for the submitter.
>
> Another thing is that issues get fixed, subsystems replaced, code removed… and the amazing thing
> is that *never* the submitter of the original report closes it, even in these obvious cases.
>
> The issue tracker is not a one way street!
>
> Marcus
>
>

I think we can close this issue:
https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/4399/deprecate-on-send-to-and-use-when-send-to

We deprecated Announcer>>on:send:to: and Announcer>>on:do: previously.

--
Cheers
Cyril


signature.asc (836 bytes) Download Attachment
Ben Coman
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
♦
♦
|

Re: [Issue tracker] *Please* look at your old reported issues!

Ben Coman
On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 11:36 PM, Ferlicot D. Cyril
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> Le 30/07/2015 09:04, Marcus Denker a écrit :
>> Hi,
>>
>> We have 622 open issues. There are *a lot* of old issues that nobody will ever look at.
>> Please check those that *you* submitted to see what the status is!
>>
>> If it is just “would be nice”, but not even on a level that you yourself are willing to even
>> send a mail to the mailing list to get people interested in helping you to push the case
>> forward, maybe you could think about closing the issue?
>>
>> Maybe someone asked a question? If you submit an issue and there is a question not answered
>> for a month, we should close it: How important can it be? Why should *I* spend the time to fix
>> this issue if *you* are not even willing to answer a question in a minute?
>>
>> It makes no sense to have lots and lots of issues that are not important even for the submitter.
>>
>> Another thing is that issues get fixed, subsystems replaced, code removed… and the amazing thing
>> is that *never* the submitter of the original report closes it, even in these obvious cases.
>>
>> The issue tracker is not a one way street!
>>
>>       Marcus
>>
>>
>
>
> I think we can close this issue:
> https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/4399/deprecate-on-send-to-and-use-when-send-to
>
> We deprecated Announcer>>on:send:to: and Announcer>>on:do: previously.
>

Do all senders need to be converted first?
cheers -ben

CyrilFerlicot
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
♦
♦
|

Re: [Issue tracker] *Please* look at your old reported issues!

CyrilFerlicot
Le 10/08/2015 18:22, Ben Coman a écrit :

> Do all senders need to be converted first?
> cheers -ben
>

I already did it.
Maybe I missed one but we should have a warning if that's the case.

--
Cheers
Cyril


signature.asc (836 bytes) Download Attachment
stepharo
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
♦
♦
|

Re: [Issue tracker] *Please* look at your old reported issues!

stepharo
In reply to this post by Ben Coman
I know that "bernardo" did many conversions now may be there are some
left. So we should have a deprecation.

Stef

Le 10/8/15 18:22, Ben Coman a écrit :

> On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 11:36 PM, Ferlicot D. Cyril
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Le 30/07/2015 09:04, Marcus Denker a écrit :
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> We have 622 open issues. There are *a lot* of old issues that nobody will ever look at.
>>> Please check those that *you* submitted to see what the status is!
>>>
>>> If it is just “would be nice”, but not even on a level that you yourself are willing to even
>>> send a mail to the mailing list to get people interested in helping you to push the case
>>> forward, maybe you could think about closing the issue?
>>>
>>> Maybe someone asked a question? If you submit an issue and there is a question not answered
>>> for a month, we should close it: How important can it be? Why should *I* spend the time to fix
>>> this issue if *you* are not even willing to answer a question in a minute?
>>>
>>> It makes no sense to have lots and lots of issues that are not important even for the submitter.
>>>
>>> Another thing is that issues get fixed, subsystems replaced, code removed… and the amazing thing
>>> is that *never* the submitter of the original report closes it, even in these obvious cases.
>>>
>>> The issue tracker is not a one way street!
>>>
>>>        Marcus
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I think we can close this issue:
>> https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/4399/deprecate-on-send-to-and-use-when-send-to
>>
>> We deprecated Announcer>>on:send:to: and Announcer>>on:do: previously.
>>
> Do all senders need to be converted first?
> cheers -ben
>
>


CyrilFerlicot
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
♦
♦
|

Re: [Issue tracker] *Please* look at your old reported issues!

CyrilFerlicot
Le 10/08/2015 21:58, stepharo a écrit :
> I know that "bernardo" did many conversions now may be there are some
> left. So we should have a deprecation.
>

Since 50201 Announcer>>on:send:to: and Annoucer>>on:do: are deprecated.

> Stef
>
>


--
Cheers
Cyril


signature.asc (836 bytes) Download Attachment
vonbecmann
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
♦
♦
|

Re: [Issue tracker] *Please* look at your old reported issues!

vonbecmann
Hi all,
the current state of the conversion its mention in


There are many false positives that i have tracked, but there is one sender that  i'm not sure about. please read the issue



On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 5:06 PM, Ferlicot D. Cyril <[hidden email]> wrote:
Le 10/08/2015 21:58, stepharo a écrit :
> I know that "bernardo" did many conversions now may be there are some
> left. So we should have a deprecation.
>

Since 50201 Announcer>>on:send:to: and Annoucer>>on:do: are deprecated.

> Stef
>
>


--
Cheers
Cyril




--
Bernardo E.C.

Sent from a cheap desktop computer in South America.
Free forum by Nabble Edit this page