Hi, What is the policy regarding nosy lists? Is it appropriate it add people to it besides oneself? As I cannot assign items, I'm sometimes tempted to add someone relevant to the list. (ie Should I add Georg to documentation related issues?) Thanks for your patience, Benjamin -- Benjamin Peterson Composer, Clarinetist, Programmer, Wikipedian, Food enthusiast, and full-time student "Nothing is more beautiful than an oboe; unless it's a chicken stuck in a vacuum cleaner"
I would find it appropriate. In theory, there should be auto-assignment, but that isn't really implemented, and I don't know whether Georg would want to be auto-assigned Documentation or Sphinx issues. It would also be possible to grant users the permission to assign, but given the experience on SF, I'd rather not (users tend to assign their issues to core developers in the hopes of expediting processing of the issue, not realizing that assignment often impedes processing). Regards, Martin
"Martin v. Löwis" writes:
My personal feeling is that it depends on the person. Some people may be prefer to "pull" their issues by searching the tracker regularly, or to read the regular Tracker reports. Overall, in my own project I want developers to think of the tracker as their friend, as an aid to getting the work done that they want done, rather than as a proxy nanny looking out for user interests. The problem of looking out for user interests is important, but IMO a nanny tracker would be counterproductive (nb I have no experience to back that up). I intend to address that by further encouraging developers to "own" the users' problems.
I haven't looked closely at the Python tracker, but I noticed that you have a "busybody" detector. I thought that requesting to be on the nosy list was what this detector was for?
Martin v. Löwis schrieb:
If there was auto-assignment, I'd opt in for those groups :) Georg -- Thus spake the Lord: Thou shalt indent with four spaces. No more, no less. Four shall be the number of spaces thou shalt indent, and the number of thy indenting shall be four. Eight shalt thou not indent, nor either indent thou two, excepting that thou then proceed to four. Tabs are right out.
I would find it appropriate. In theory, there should be auto-assignment, but that isn't really implemented, and I don't know whether Georg would want to be auto-assigned Documentation or Sphinx issues. It would also be possible to grant users the permission to assign, but given the experience on SF, I'd rather not (users tend to assign their issues to core developers in the hopes of expediting processing of the issue, not realizing that assignment often impedes processing). Regards, Martin
"Martin v. Löwis" writes:
My personal feeling is that it depends on the person. Some people may be prefer to "pull" their issues by searching the tracker regularly, or to read the regular Tracker reports. Overall, in my own project I want developers to think of the tracker as their friend, as an aid to getting the work done that they want done, rather than as a proxy nanny looking out for user interests. The problem of looking out for user interests is important, but IMO a nanny tracker would be counterproductive (nb I have no experience to back that up). I intend to address that by further encouraging developers to "own" the users' problems.
I haven't looked closely at the Python tracker, but I noticed that you have a "busybody" detector. I thought that requesting to be on the nosy list was what this detector was for?
Martin v. Löwis schrieb:
If there was auto-assignment, I'd opt in for those groups :) Georg -- Thus spake the Lord: Thou shalt indent with four spaces. No more, no less. Four shall be the number of spaces thou shalt indent, and the number of thy indenting shall be four. Eight shalt thou not indent, nor either indent thou two, excepting that thou then proceed to four. Tabs are right out.
participants (4)
-
"Martin v. Löwis" -
Benjamin Peterson -
Georg Brandl -
Stephen J. Turnbull