[asterisk-dev] Bugs/patches 16033 and 16590 ignored forever

[Steve Totaro]

On Sat, Apr 17, 2010 at 8:01 AM, Kevin P. Fleming <kpfleming at digium.com>wrote:

> Steve Totaro wrote:
>
> > If I am reading this correctly, the patch is only two lines of code, why
> > not go for the low hanging fruit?
>
> That's how things used to work... developers would just randomly select
> issues to work on, and frequently the 'easy' stuff (relatively) would be
> what they chose. The result was that crash bugs, release blockers and
> other major issues just sat around and never got attention, and simple
> issues that affect a small number of users got fixed instead.
>
> The system in place now attempts to ensure that Digium's resources are
> used to address the issues with the most impact on the user community.
> That unfortunately will leave issues that have less impact hanging
> around with little (or no) attention, but since we can't address every
> issue that gets entered, that's unavoidable. This system does result in
> a pool of available issues for willing and able community developers to
> work on, though, since the more complex/long term issues are being
> handled by the Digium team whenever possible. There are quite a few
> people in the community with commit access who can bring issues like
> these to resolution (especially when patches are provided and the
> testing has been done), so I'd encourage you all to get on IRC on
> #asterisk-dev and see if you can convince one of them to take on your
> issues.
>
> --
> Kevin P. Fleming
> Digium, Inc. | Director of Software Technologies
> 445 Jan Davis Drive NW - Huntsville, AL 35806 - USA
> skype: kpfleming | jabber: kfleming at digium.com
> Check us out at www.digium.com & www.asterisk.org
>

Thanks for explaining the evolution of the current SOP.  It makes sense now
that you explained it.

Steve T
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-dev/attachments/20100417/02ae0156/attachment.htm