Re: [Usability]Re: ui-review bugs

[Luis Villa <louie ximian com>]

This is a nasty sort of loop- the general impression of the release-team
was that the ui-review was so late as to make it very hard to hold
people to it. And of course we had a less than stellar pursuit of all
bugs (not just ui-review) during the 2.2 cycle. So... I'm not sure what
to say there, except I think we really need to give the idea one more
cycle (and ideally get more people involved in pursuing and trying to
organize both finding and fixing) before we declare it a failure and try
to come up with something else. I'm sure that's a frustrating
non-answer, Calum, but I think it's the best thing I can say right now
and the best we as a project can do- this is still a fairly new idea
(only two iterations, neither with great response and organization on
both sides) so I do think we should give it more of a chance.

Luis

On Thu, 2003-03-27 at 18:11, Calum Benson wrote:
> On Thu, 2003-03-27 at 17:43, Andrew Sobala wrote:
> 
> > Well, 100% of the bugs are not going to be fixed on time.
> 
> Perhaps not, but according to bugzilla, less than 20% have been fixed.
> 
> > I'm just suggesting you look at the open ones while doing the ui-review to save
> > time, so you don't discuss and resuggest issues that are already filed,
> > so you have _more_ time to do the ui-review process.
> 
> I appreciate that... but the reason we didn't have to do it last time
> was because for 2.0, the whole point was that all the ui-review
> suggestions *were* fixed prior to the release (or of course closed out
> if the maintainer rejected them for some reason), so there weren't any
> open ui-review bugs left to look at :)  If that's not going to be the
> case going forward, I don't really see much point in having a
> release-team-sanctioned ui-review effort at all, if it's going to so
> little impact on the thing being released.
> 
> Cheeri,
> Calum.