On Thu, 7 Mar 2002 19:18:50 -0600 Skip Montanaro <skip@pobox.com> wrote: > > Jonathan> There is a patch that has been unlooked at. > It was discussed > Jonathan> on c.l.py., some people decided it was a > bug, and I was told > Jonathan> to make a patch and put it on SF. I did. It > has been almost > Jonathan> two months now, and there has been no > response. > > In composing my email to c.l.py today asking for new > developers I did a > quick browse of both the bugs and patches on SF. There > are, as I recall, > around 300 open bugs and 150 patches. About have the > bugs and two-thirds of > the patches are not assigned. I didn't look at the > submission dates, but > I'll wager there are more than a few that are more than > two months old. > > Hence the need for more "processing power". When we were working on Python 2.0, PythonLabs made a serious commitment to keep the list of bugs on one page. Lots of people fixed bugs to achieve that goal, and more processing power will definitely help. One other thing that helped was that I spent many hours each week tracking bugs and making sure someone was working on them. I intend to pick that task up again for Python 2.3. It would be great if there were more developers to lean on for the bugs. Jeremy
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4