[Asterisk-Dev] Re: Features requests on bugs.digium.com

[Brian West]

Ok anyone that wishes we are accepting more bug marshals right now so if its
your time to step up and help.  Find me on IRC you can help.

Let me show you something anthm and I worked on for a week (along when we
overhauled the sip codec stuff too)

http://bugs.digium.com/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=0002971

COMMENT ON IT.. because this is one example where only a few people have
commented on it and those people are actively working on the project.  So if
you want to have some say in any changes in the codec pref order in IAX2 you
better speak up or we change it and break something then come back bitching
about it.  You say features or changes should be there but NOBODY comments
on them and everyone has their own agenda and that's all they focus on.  

bkw

> -----Original Message-----
> From: asterisk-dev-bounces at lists.digium.com [mailto:asterisk-dev-
> bounces at lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of Tony Mountifield
> Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 3:03 AM
> To: asterisk-dev at lists.digium.com
> Subject: [Asterisk-Dev] Re: Features requests on bugs.digium.com
> 
> In article <4429D728-5A12-11D9-B70B-000A95C46612 at stevek.com>,
> Steve Kann <stevek at stevek.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Dec 29, 2004, at 9:50 PM, Brian West wrote:
> >
> > > Ok I think all feature requests need to be gone from
> bugs.digium.com...
> 
> I strongly disagree.
> 
> > > if it has a patch it should be ok.  But feature requests I don't think
> > > should be on the "bug" tracker.  It is a bug tracker right?
> 
> There's nothing wrong with the way its being used; if anything, it is the
> name "bug" that is too narrow and restrictive.
> 
> > > So we can focus... what do you think... all raise your hands if the
> bug
> > > tracker should only be for bugs and bugs with patches, or new features
> with
> > > patches...?
> 
> No, I raise my hand for what Steve says below:
> 
> > I think the bug tracker should be for any proposed change to asterisk,
> > be it a new feature, enhancement, bugfix or whatever, whether or not it
> > has a patch attached.  It really ought to be the central location where
> > all projects are discussed and planned.
> 
> What he said.
> 
> > To be honest, I think you all are way too closed happy with the bug
> > tracker.
> 
> I agree with this.
> 
> > For example, there was a bug in there that steve davies opened for the
> > new jitterbuffer, but nobody posted to it for a few days (maybe even
> > weeks), and it got closed.   Closed should happen for things you don't
> > ever intend to do, not just things that you aren't working on RIGHT
> > NOW.
> 
> And I agree with this 100%. Of course Closed is also appropriate for
> bug reports that have now been fixed, and features that are now
> incorporated. Things that are still pending may have valid reasons
> for going quiet for a while. By all means try to stir up activity
> every so often if necessary, but don't be so trigger-happy on the
> Close button.
> 
> Cheers
> Tony
> --
> Tony Mountifield
> Work: tony at softins.co.uk - http://www.softins.co.uk
> Play: tony at mountifield.org - http://tony.mountifield.org
> _______________________________________________
> Asterisk-Dev mailing list
> Asterisk-Dev at lists.digium.com
> http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev
> To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
>    http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev