[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Libreoffice] Fwd: [PATCH] Bug 39167

[Friedrich Strohmaier]

Hi Gerald, *,

Am 06.08.2011 08:09 schrieb Gerald Leppert:
> Friedrich Strohmaier schrieb:

> thanks for your reply and comments.

[..]

>> If not, You are member of a big group of people *assuming* a bug to
>> be an "easy bug". I understand every software engineer to be not 
>> amused beeing faced that assumption beeing estimated as a fact.

> You are right, it is an assumption. Although I think that
> assumptions are more often correct than wrong,

How do you come to that result? Remember: EasyHacks is a developer means
to attract new developers - nothing more.

> I fully agree to the mode that non-coders don't enter [EasyHack]s, 
> but instead enter [ProposedEasyHack]s. Then it does not conflict with
> the idea of EasyHacks.

Of course it does. A new Developer, interested in contributing to
LibreOffice is led to that page to find a low barrier entrance. He picks
one up, ask on the developer's list, how to procede, get's hints from at
least the "founder" of the easy hack which decided to be mentor on it by
publishing it. What now, if he picks a "ProposedEasyHack", which is
nearby?..

>> [...] As far as I got it, EasyHacks is a plain software engineer 
>> means where a bug recognized as EasyHack by the expert isn't 
>> resolved in short time but instead put to EasyHacks page waiting 
>> for a new Hacker resolving it under the eyes of this particular 
>> expert and learning the code meanwhile.

> Yes, that's what it seems to be the case now if you refer to the 
> EasyHacks in bugzilla.

No, that's not true. "EasyHacks" is an ecosystem to attract new
developers - The wikipage is the main means of that, because they are
easily visible there.

> In the beginning, some people loosely started to compile easy hacks 
> in the LibreOffice wiki.

.. Which was an idea and action of the development team..

>> [...] Please understand: You can only propose an EasyHack if You 
>> are a developer and could fix that bug *Yourself*.

> I don't understand this point.

I sadly see, so I obviously couldn't pass the message..

> Do you agree or disagree that users who have the sound assumption 
> that something might be an easy hack may enter a [ProposedEasyHack] 
> and developers may change that tag to [EasyHack].

Disagree, because:
I can't see how this should work in respect of the EasyHacks' intention.
Remember: When an EasyHack appears in that page all preparing work
(investigation, estimation) already has been done. A ProposedEasyHack
would need a (senior) developer to pick it up, investigate it, solve it
or instead estimate it as EasyHack. I can't see the difference from just
entering it as a feature request/bug in the bugtracking system.

> If you agree, that's fine. If you disagree, I would oppose. IMHO
> such a restriction would lead to a situation where many good ideas
> are missed and really easy hacks would be forgotten (please refer to
> my list of bugs in my previous email).

If they will be forgotten I'd assume noone except the reporter can
prevent it. ;o))

What You describe is some kind of wish machine, everyone can
throw in his favorite "must have" feature. Even if this ever worked I
doubt, it would lead to a useful product at the end.

So to sum it up:
For me it looks like You want to solve a problem (developers don't care
users) by hijacking a feature You assume giving kind of direct access to
development. From the destinated tool - the issuetracker - You assume it
doesn't.

While I agree with You, the Problem which gives the above *impression*
(developers don't care users) is one to be solved and is one we *will*
solve one day, the way You try to go, for me doesn`t seem suitable in
this regard.


Gruß/regards
-- 
Friedrich
Libreoffice-Box http://libreofficebox.org/
LibreOffice and more on CD/DVD images