Out of sight out of mind

[Andrew Edwards via Digitalmars-d]

Understood... Sorry for the noise.

On 6/17/14, 9:53 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Jun 2014 09:23:50 -0400, Andrew Edwards <ridimz at yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 6/16/14, 10:09 PM, Jesse Phillips wrote:
>>> On Sunday, 15 June 2014 at 15:37:22 UTC, Andrew Edwards wrote:
>>>> Observe the following truths:
>>>>     1) Issue tricking and resolution are kept separate in our community
>>>>     2) That which is not visible garners no attention
>>>
>>> Your message has not convinced me that the change would address the
>>> issues present.
>>>
>>>  From what I've seen Bugzilla has integrated well with Github.
>>> Mentioning a bug in a conversation may not get an autolink, but that
>>> doesn't sound like the issue trying to be solved.
>>>
>>
>> The issue I'm trying to solve is to make "issues" more visible to
>> people who work on them. By putting those issues in the same location
>> where developers work, they immediately become more visible. Does it
>> solve the overall problem? No, definitely not! Doing so will not
>> "MAKE" anyone properly categorize, update, or even look at those
>> issues. But it does them more and therefore, garners more attention
>> than if it were hidden away in a separate system.
>
> I don't think this is an issue. All developers looking at bugs and/or
> pull requests know that they are two different systems. The two systems
> are linked, generally by the post-commit hook on github. Also, these
> statements are lacking some basis in evidence. Are there developers who
> work on any of our projects who agree with this statement? It's not
> always worth looking at who "might" work on it if we do X or Y, as that
> group of people often is all talk.
>
> I think the largest issue is the daunting backlog of open bugs in
> bugzilla. You can close 100 bugs and still not really make a dent in it.
>
> Bugzilla has recently improved quite a bit. Little things are now much
> more pleasant (e.g. keywords now pop up a list of valid keywords instead
> of having to click on a separate page to see them).
>
>> The argument I'm hearing from the majority (at least those who choose
>> to respond) is "too much work for minimal gain." My question is too
>> much work for who? I'm volunteering to do the entire move myself.
>
> I don't think that's the main argument, I think the main argument is
> that github issues does not have comparable features, which means we
> lose data and/or functions if we switch over. I don't think the fact
> that both would be on the same site is enough of a gain to offset that.
>
> -Steve