<html><head></head><body><div class="gmail_quote">Craig Bradney <cbradney@scribus.info> wrote:<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<pre class="k9mail">On 29/05/2014 1:00 pm, JLuc wrote:<br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #729fcf; padding-left: 1ex;">Hello,<br /><br />Scribus now is my only DTP tool.<br />I'm happy with it, but not totally because some bugs hinder my everyday use.<br />I can circumvent them, but it's like riding on a bike<br />with one hand deep into my trouser's pocket : uncomfortable.<br /><br />Most of these hindrances are longlasting bugs (many years !).<br />Beside, quite strange is that some of them aren't even acknowledged on the bug tracker.<br />I will not here talk of these bugs that hinder my everyday use,<br />because - who knows - they might be specific to my uses,<br />and IMO, most important would be to define :<br />which are the Most Annoying Bugs that are painfull,<br />the most of the time, for the most of the users.<br />- this is very different from the 1.5 roadmap<br />which mainly includes new features to be
coded,<br />or very recent features to be improved -.<br /><br />This list would bring attention toward these bugs.<br />It would help motivate some of the devs someday to tackle one of them.<br />Beside, as an occasional dev, i feel that it could help external devs<br />to work on one of them, since prior discussions and consensus<br />might provide technical hints on the scribus strategy and current works,<br />and faith that a provided patch has a chance of ever be merged.<br /><br />If some of you agree on this MAB idea,<br />if some of the core devs agree on this idea,<br />then we should first agree on a list of criteria<br />that define a bug as Most Annoying Bug.<br />For reference we could look at how LibreOffice deals with the subjects.<br />HardHacks, as also called them Libreoffice team, have a nice definition we could use to start with.<br /><a href="https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/HardHacks">https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/HardHacks</a><br />For the regular
"MAB pages" they use now mostly, they have :<br /><a href="https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/Most_Annoying_Bugs">https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/Most_Annoying_Bugs</a><br /><a href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44446">https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44446</a><br />Quote of the first liste page : What is a hard hack ?<br />Hard hacks should meet the below requirements:<br />- Be relatively annoying for a significant amount of people<br />- Be relatively difficult to solve and/or track down<br />- Crashes/data loss are good candidates but not necessary<br />- Backtraces should be done on proposed hard hacks before they become accepted hard hacks<br />- Enhancement requests should NOT be on the list<br /><br />What do you think of that ?</blockquote><br /><br />Yes, good idea.<br /><br />A wiki page needs creating with a list of the bug and the description.<br /><br />Craig<br /><br /><br /><hr /><br />scribus-dev mailing list<br
/>scribus-dev@lists.scribus.net<br /><a href="http://lists.scribus.net/mailman/listinfo/scribus-dev">http://lists.scribus.net/mailman/listinfo/scribus-dev</a><br /></pre></blockquote></div><br clear="all">This is a good idea. It will help developers prioritize important contributions whenever possible.<br>
-- <br>
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.</body></html>