Re: 2.4 enhancements in the release notes

[Elijah Newren <newren math utah edu>]

On Sun, 2003-08-31 at 15:30, John Fleck wrote:
> I'd be a happier guy if someone had the time to actually go through the
> 114 bugs returned by that query and see how many of them really deserve
> the claim "user-requested enhancements". I think hackers' responsiveness
> to user requests is important and worth bragging on, but I don't want to
> oversell this point with a big number that's not justifiable.

You correctly point out that a simple query doesn't tell the whole
story--there are likely many of those 114 that wouldn't qualify. 
However, you seem to have missed the other end--namely that not all
enhancements are marked as such.  I think the statement, as written, is
fine to include.  But, if someone really wants to go to the trouble of
sifting through which of those 114 bugs are accurate, then one will also
have to sift through several hundred (or perhaps even thousand) more
bugs to see which other ones weren't marked as enhancement but really
were such and belonged on this list.

> Anyone up for the task of pawing through those bugs and telling me how
> many qualify?

Considering the fact that I don't think going through just these 114
bugs would give you an accurate number, I don't think that this is
really a task that I want to take on.  I consider it totally valid to
leave the claim as you have it now, on the grounds that you'll probably
remove just as many from the list as what you'll add.  

[Granted, this isn't scientific or exact, but it's my gut feeling having
gone through several thousand bug reports this year.  And considering
all the cleaning that could be done to bugzilla in the amount of time
it'd take to accomplish this task, I feel perfectly fine leaving your
claim as is.  Of course, if someone else wants to, by all means do so.]

> Thanks,
> John

Just my $0.02,
Elijah