[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: automatic accidental style voice: too many written accidentals
From: |
Graham Percival |
Subject: |
Re: automatic accidental style voice: too many written accidentals |
Date: |
Mon, 26 Oct 2009 13:03:10 +0000 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) |
On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 01:43:59PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
> Graham Percival <address@hidden> writes:
>
> > It should not be necessary. The Bug Meister should respond within
> > a week, either asking for more information, or informing you of
> > the issue number. (ideally with a direct link, but a simple
> > "thanks, added as 1234" is also ok)
> >
> > Of course, as with everything else in open source projects, the
> > Bug Meister position is a volunteer job, so we take what we can
> > get. If anybody thinks they can do a better job than the current
> > person (including any of my jobs), I would encourage them to offer
> > to take over the work. Or at least to work as an assistant.
>
> A response time of a week is a sign that the mechanism is not
> working out.
We *don't* have a response time of a week. Currently the only
person who has shown the slightest bit of interest doing this job
does it an average of once every two weeks.
> Things like weeding out duplicates can happen at a
> slower time span. It is also possible to put a bug into a
> database with a state "pending", "unverified" or similar. That
> gives a better impression than a black hole.
I do not agree with making the issue tracker open to everybody.
We'll get tons of uninformed users posting non-bugs.
> The results are not encouraging to contributors.
Maybe you didn't notice the above note. I WOULD ENCOURAGE ANYBODY
TO OFFER TO HELP WITH THE WORK.
Cheers,
- Graham
- Re: automatic accidental style voice: too many written accidentals, (continued)
- Re: automatic accidental style voice: too many written accidentals, Neil Puttock, 2009/10/17
- Re: automatic accidental style voice: too many written accidentals, Neil Puttock, 2009/10/17
- Re: automatic accidental style voice: too many written accidentals, Frédéric Bron, 2009/10/18
- Re: automatic accidental style voice: too many written accidentals, Frédéric Bron, 2009/10/20
- Re: automatic accidental style voice: too many written accidentals, Neil Puttock, 2009/10/22
- Re: automatic accidental style voice: too many written accidentals, Frédéric Bron, 2009/10/24
- Re: automatic accidental style voice: too many written accidentals, Valentin Villenave, 2009/10/25
- Re: automatic accidental style voice: too many written accidentals, David Kastrup, 2009/10/25
- Re: automatic accidental style voice: too many written accidentals, Graham Percival, 2009/10/25
- Re: automatic accidental style voice: too many written accidentals, David Kastrup, 2009/10/26
- Re: automatic accidental style voice: too many written accidentals,
Graham Percival <=
- Re: automatic accidental style voice: too many written accidentals, David Kastrup, 2009/10/26
- Re: automatic accidental style voice: too many written accidentals, Graham Percival, 2009/10/26
- Re: automatic accidental style voice: too many written accidentals, Valentin Villenave, 2009/10/26
- Re: automatic accidental style voice: too many written accidentals, Frédéric Bron, 2009/10/25
- Re: automatic accidental style voice: too many written accidentals, Trevor Daniels, 2009/10/25
- Re: [spam probable] Re: automatic accidental style voice: too many written accidentals, Frédéric Bron, 2009/10/26
- Re: automatic accidental style voice: too many written accidentals, Trevor Daniels, 2009/10/26
- Re: automatic accidental style voice: too many written accidentals, Mats Bengtsson, 2009/10/26
- Re: automatic accidental style voice: too many written accidentals, Frédéric Bron, 2009/10/29
- Re: automatic accidental style voice: too many written accidentals, David Kastrup, 2009/10/29