[scribus-dev] The Scribus developers Hit Parades

[Andreas Vox]

> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Craig Bradney [mailto:cbradney at scribus.info]
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 24. November 2010 21:05
> An: scribus-dev at lists.scribus.net
> Betreff: Re: [scribus-dev] The Scribus developers Hit Parades
> 
> On 11/24/10 8:59 PM, a.l.e wrote:
> > Cari amici vicini e lontani,
> >
> > At the recent Scribus Weekend in Paris we have looked for a way for
> the people in the Scribus community to communicate their wishes to the
> Scribus team.
> >
> > We agreed on an on Hit Parade of bugs to be fixed and features to be
> implemented.
...
> > The second list is the one with the top three big bug or features.
> >
> > 1.	Undo for text (1 week)
> > 2.	Add Scripter 2 (1 week)
> > 3.	Release 1.4 (1 Week)
> >
> >
> >
> > Some remarks:
> >
> > - This week we present the list as is. For the next week I promise
> that we will add to each entry a reference to the bug tracker.
> >
> > - We would like to get the whole community to participate to the
> compilation of this Hit Parade but -- at least for now -- we can't
> setup an open voting system for the bugs and feature.
> >
> > - If we can get an infrastructure for voting on bugs to be fixed and
> features to be implemented, personally, I'd prefer to have a third top
> ten for it and let these ones simply mirror the subjective wishes of
> some self designated "power users".
> >
> > - And even if there is no voting system, please discuss those entries
> (and other propositions) on the mailing list and in the bug tracker:
> your comment won't stay unnoticed!
> >
> > - If you don't agree on the way this list has been put together, join
> us or compile your own list!
> >
> > - We have compiled the list on Saturday evening: the bug at place 5
> has already been fixed... so we certainly will have new entry next
> week.
> >
> >
> > Voilà, the next Hit Parade will be sent the next week on the 1st of
> December! Hopefully with lot of new entries...
> 
> I don't see the point, you have no perspective on the code or the
> efforts required to do this..
> At least 1,3,9, and 2.1 require massive changes or things we have no
> control over or have not been able to solve for years.
> 
> 2.2 is done in 1.5.0svn.
> 2.3 is not a feature or a bug.
> 
> Craig

Hi Craig!

In fact this was my idea (a_l_e wanted some sort of contract where the developers were to fix 1 bug per week). The idea is to present a priorisation of bugs from the user perspective so that the developers can see how to make as many people happy as possible :-)

The "(1 week)" is not the estimated development effort but the time this particular issue has been in the hit parade. The Top 3 in list 2 are supposed to be all long-term bugs; the Top 10 in list 1 is for (hopefully) quick-to-fix but unpleasant bugs.

We talked about 1.1 in Paris and I think it should be solvable with Qt 4.

I agree that 2.3 doesn't belong there.