T
Terry Reedy
Go to the bottom of
http://bugs.python.org/issue?@template=search&status=1
enter 1 in the Message Count box and hit Search.
At the moment, this gets 510 hits. Some have had headers updated, nearly
half have had a person add himself as 'nosy' (put 1 in the Nosy count
box to count those that have not), but none have a written response.
In the past two weeks, I have commented on some old orphans and gotten a
couple of previously orphaned patches applied and the issue closed. But
I am not prepared to spend my whole life on this ;=).
We need more issue reviewers.
Clearly.
If you want to contibute, opportunity is here.
With 500 orphans, and 2200 other open issues,
there must be something that matches your interests and abilities.
Use other search fields to narrow the choices.
If you want to contibute to the tracker, this may help:
http://wiki.python.org/moin/TrackerDocs/
Then read examples of comments already there.
Or consider my first-response comment to
http://bugs.python.org/issue8990
To write that, I
* verified the reported behavior, though I forgot to explicitly say so;
when doing so, include version and system (such as 3.1.2, WinXP), as
that is sometimes helpful.
* read the relevant doc section and pasted it in to establish a basis
for discussion (the OP might have done that, but did not, so I did).
Everyone reading this should at least be able to do this much for an
issue like this, and this much *is* helpful.
* compared behavior and doc and concluded that there is a bug.
* read the posted patch as best I could, which is not much in this case,
but it at least looked like a real diff file.
* noticed that the diff did *not* patch the appropriate unit test file.
* discussed two possible fixes and identified which the OP choose.
* wrote an 'executive summary' both for the OP and future reviewers.
Oh yes, I also adjusted the headers. Although new reviewers cannot do
that, you *can* suggest in the message what changes to make.
Special offer to readers of this thread, especially new reviewers:
if you make such a suggestion, you may email me, subject: Tracker, with
one clickable link like the above, cut and pasted from the browser URL
box, per line of the message.
Perhaps you are shy and uncomfortable saying much. Well so was I. I
started about 5 years ago with *safe* comments and have s l o w l y
expanded my comfort zone. The shock of discovering this week that there
are 500 orphans, some 2 years old, expanded it. After no response for a
year or two, even an imperfect response must be better than nothing.
While there is occasional negativity on the tracker, I believe it
averages less per message than python-list, which itself is pretty decent.
Terry Jan Reedy
http://bugs.python.org/issue?@template=search&status=1
enter 1 in the Message Count box and hit Search.
At the moment, this gets 510 hits. Some have had headers updated, nearly
half have had a person add himself as 'nosy' (put 1 in the Nosy count
box to count those that have not), but none have a written response.
In the past two weeks, I have commented on some old orphans and gotten a
couple of previously orphaned patches applied and the issue closed. But
I am not prepared to spend my whole life on this ;=).
We need more issue reviewers.
Clearly.
If you want to contibute, opportunity is here.
With 500 orphans, and 2200 other open issues,
there must be something that matches your interests and abilities.
Use other search fields to narrow the choices.
If you want to contibute to the tracker, this may help:
http://wiki.python.org/moin/TrackerDocs/
Then read examples of comments already there.
Or consider my first-response comment to
http://bugs.python.org/issue8990
To write that, I
* verified the reported behavior, though I forgot to explicitly say so;
when doing so, include version and system (such as 3.1.2, WinXP), as
that is sometimes helpful.
* read the relevant doc section and pasted it in to establish a basis
for discussion (the OP might have done that, but did not, so I did).
Everyone reading this should at least be able to do this much for an
issue like this, and this much *is* helpful.
* compared behavior and doc and concluded that there is a bug.
* read the posted patch as best I could, which is not much in this case,
but it at least looked like a real diff file.
* noticed that the diff did *not* patch the appropriate unit test file.
* discussed two possible fixes and identified which the OP choose.
* wrote an 'executive summary' both for the OP and future reviewers.
Oh yes, I also adjusted the headers. Although new reviewers cannot do
that, you *can* suggest in the message what changes to make.
Special offer to readers of this thread, especially new reviewers:
if you make such a suggestion, you may email me, subject: Tracker, with
one clickable link like the above, cut and pasted from the browser URL
box, per line of the message.
Perhaps you are shy and uncomfortable saying much. Well so was I. I
started about 5 years ago with *safe* comments and have s l o w l y
expanded my comfort zone. The shock of discovering this week that there
are 500 orphans, some 2 years old, expanded it. After no response for a
year or two, even an imperfect response must be better than nothing.
While there is occasional negativity on the tracker, I believe it
averages less per message than python-list, which itself is pretty decent.
Terry Jan Reedy