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

[Steve Murphy]

On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 6:48 AM, Leif Madsen
<leif.madsen at asteriskdocs.org>wrote:

> Kirill 'Big K' Katsnelson wrote:
> > Your explanation is indeed sensible, but there are different resource
> > pools involved in debugging/fixing the problem, and in testing the fix.
> > If I report a bug without sending in a fix, there is a chance that it
> > will be fixed by a developer. Then I confirm the fix, and it is good to
> > go. On the other hand, when I fix the problem by myself, there is no one
> > out there to try the fix, and, therefore, assuming rare enough a
> > problem, the fix will unlikely be confirmed and committed. There are
> > just many more developers willing to fix the bug that does not affect
> > them personally that testers willing to test a fix to a bug that does
> > not affect them personally.
> >
> > Such a disposition looks quite paradoxical to me.
>
> I don't quite see it that way though. From the viewpoint of the Digium
> developer
> resource pool, issues that have patches actually get rated higher on the
> list of
> issues to be resolved because the engineering effort to resolve such an
> issue is
> (typically) much lower. With a patch that resolves the issue for the
> reporter,
> the developer is that much further ahead than if they just had debugging
> information. With the patch, the developer knows the exact area of code to
> start
> working in, and can potentially reproduce the issue more quickly.
>
> Sometimes it just requires a code review because the issue is that much
> more
> transparent when a patch is provided.
>
> Of course if the issue does not affect a large number of users, then it may
> be
> possible an issue could sit for a long time even with a patch. But as Kevin
> states, there are open source developers who hang out in #asterisk-dev who
> may
> be willing to move an issue forward, and if a patch is provided, it
> certainly
> makes it easier for them to do that.
>
> I guess what I'm saying is don't stop submitting issues and providing
> patches
> with the thought that issues without patches get worked on first, because
> that
> is certainly not the case. In some cases they do, but it generally is
> because
> they affect a large(r) pool of users.
>
> > (I know -- I have already be advised to find a sympathetic soul or pay
> > someone for testing -- but that does not resolve the paradox: I do not
> > have to do all that If I do not send in a patch).
> >
> > I think that Paul Belanger describes essentially the same problem,  but
> > from a different vantage point.
>
> I'm not sure how to resolve the paradox you're speaking of. I'm not even
> sure I
> agree a paradox exists. Separate pools of resources do not exist for
> testing and
> development.
>
> The Digium development team does both testing and development, along with
> code
> review and committing. We don't have separate testing teams outside of the
> development group for each of those tasks. Each issue that is assigned to a
> developer is taken through all steps of the process (reproducing the issue,
> resolving the issue, and closing the issue).
>
> All that can be done is to pick the issues that affect the most number of
> people
> and work on larger issues (i.e. many development hours that otherwise might
> not
> be done by the community because development of Asterisk is not their
> primary
> responsibility). And with the knowledge that not every issue can be
> resolved by
> this pool alone, it is up to the community to determine what other issues
> are
> most important to them to resolve.
>
> Now with that said, if you have a particular issue that isn't overly large
> that
> you need a code review done on to move it forward, Kevin mentioned that
> several
> developers hang out in #asterisk-dev on irc.freenode.net that may be able
> to
> move the issue forward. Beyond that, I'm all ears for how we can continue
> to
> refine the process to move issues forward at a more efficient pace with the
> available resources.
>
> Leif Madsen -- Bug Marshal
>
>
I offer the solution to all such paradoxes. This may sound pretty mercenary,
but
time and money and fixes to Asterisk are all highly intermingled....

I have the necessary qualifications to test patches, to interpret them from
one
release to the next, to merge them into trunk, to make sure there are no
side
affects. If you don't have a patch, I can even come up with one for you.
I have commit privileges to the source, I am familiar with the system,
and can handle bugs (and I've closed a lot of them), at least,  until I mess
up,
or abuse the system, and I don't plan on doing such.

For a price, I can represent both an individual and the asterisk community
at the same time. If indeed the patch does have no side-effects, this might
be done in just
a few hours. I charge a standard rate per hour that is less than, or
comparable to
what plumbers, machinists, and so forth require. Others would require less,
others
more. I am a, if not THE :), gun-for-hire for the minority, for the ignored,
for the outcast, the downtrodden,
the oppressed.

If you have a just cause, and are correct in your patch, I can join you in
your cause.

If you don't, I'll tell you so.

Hire me. Make life easier. I am your average Asterisk Consultant. I'd
normally
restrict this kind of talk to asterisk-biz, but it is just crying to be said
here!

murf

-- 
Steve Murphy
ParseTree Corp
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-dev/attachments/20100420/5d7430ca/attachment-0001.htm