Re: Re: QA Bug remind : to clarify

Bertrand Mansion wrote:

Anders Betnér wrote:

This is the first time I speak up on the pear-lists, the recent rants from some immature coding prima donnas forced me to. As a php developer I really appreciate the hard work the QA team is doing to keep the widespread flora of pear packages to conform to some common rules. I think that their work can lift pear from useful to great. It really surprises me that some developers resist a change in that direction. My hope is that their view will not prevail in the pear community. While I don't share these individuals' views I am very thankful for the hours they spend making their packages.

Could you let me know which packages you maintain in PEAR and how many unjustified reminders you received ? Probably none, so your opinion is not interesting, thank you. The reason his opinion is interesting is that he's a user. And he believes that this is making PEAR better. In fact, I'm quite sure that the mere existance of a QA team will change the way some people think of PEAR. Especially when the QA team takes some small steps toward making PEAR a) less buggy and b) more uniform.

That said, you shouldn't take the bug reminders personally. As soon as they are implemented in pearweb, it will be as automatic as the manual getting rebuilt. And I don't think it's wise for any developer to ignore the bugs. I don't mind the regular reminders that I'm subscribed to certain mailing lists (e.g., sourceforge or liveuser). You live with things like that. It's part of what OpenScource is. And if you are so in tune with the bugs that you don't need the reminders, it's not hard to delete the reminders unread. And since they're not more than one per week, it's not more than a 5 second job per week. And slapping users when they make a comment isn't productive. Remember, the customer is *always* right. That's how you get them to come back. Even if you don't implement their suggestions. Klaus