Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!weretis.net!feeder1.news.weretis.net!feeder.erje.net!1.eu.feeder.erje.net!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed7.news.xs4all.nl!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail Return-Path: X-Original-To: python-list@python.org Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org X-Spam-Status: OK 0.012 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 0.98; '*S*': 0.00; 'ignored': 0.05; 'contributor': 0.07; 'lines.': 0.07; 'means,': 0.07; 'patches': 0.09; 'received:80.91': 0.09; 'received:80.91.229': 0.09; 'received:gmane.org': 0.09; 'received:list': 0.09; 'subject:2.7': 0.09; 'bug': 0.10; 'python': 0.10; 'packages.': 0.15; '...)': 0.16; 'bugs,': 0.16; 'fixing.': 0.16; 'project)': 0.16; 'received:80.91.229.3': 0.16; 'received:dip0.t-ipconnect.de': 0.16; 'received:plane.gmane.org': 0.16; 'received:t-ipconnect.de': 0.16; 'resilient,': 0.16; 'subject:non': 0.16; 'volunteer?': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.16; 'fixed.': 0.18; '(in': 0.18; '(not': 0.20; 'changes': 0.20; '2015': 0.20; 'accepted.': 0.20; 'tracker': 0.20; 'fix': 0.21; 'fixing': 0.22; 'setup,': 0.22; 'trying': 0.22; 'code.': 0.23; '(or': 0.23; 'seems': 0.23; 'header:User-Agent:1': 0.26; 'header:X-Complaints-To:1': 0.26; 'sense': 0.26; 'external': 0.27; 'bugs': 0.27; 'least': 0.27; 'fine': 0.28; 'fighting': 0.29; 'thread,': 0.29; 'actively': 0.30; 'programmers': 0.30; 'another': 0.32; 'core': 0.32; 'though,': 0.32; 'maybe': 0.33; 'getting': 0.33; 'point': 0.33; 'problem': 0.33; 'source': 0.33; 'usually': 0.33; 'interface,': 0.33; 'surprised': 0.33; 'view,': 0.33; 'open': 0.33; 'quickly': 0.34; 'file': 0.34; 'list': 0.34; 'gets': 0.35; 'solving': 0.35; 'knowledge': 0.35; 'something': 0.35; 'submitting': 0.35; 'but': 0.36; 'should': 0.36; 'there': 0.36; '(and': 0.36; 'to:addr:python-list': 0.36; 'subject:?': 0.36; 'subject:: ': 0.37; 'really': 0.37; 'received:org': 0.37; 'beyond': 0.37; 'johnson': 0.37; 'charset:us-ascii': 0.37; 'seem': 0.37; 'things': 0.38; '(with': 0.38; 'reports': 0.38; 'why': 0.39; 'goes': 0.39; 'test': 0.39; 'sure': 0.39; 'subject:-': 0.39; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.40; 'received:de': 0.40; 'ever': 0.60; 'high': 0.60; 'share': 0.61; 'real': 0.62; 'more': 0.63; 'excited': 0.63; 'times': 0.63; 'interest': 0.64; 'world': 0.64; 'you.': 0.64; 'received:217': 0.66; 'future.': 0.67; 'spend': 0.67; 'helping': 0.67; 'frustrated': 0.72; 'lack': 0.76; 'exclusive': 0.81; '(years': 0.84; 'alone!': 0.84; 'burdensome': 0.84; 'cosmetic': 0.84; 'horrible': 0.84; 'hunt': 0.84; 'lacks': 0.84; 'wheel': 0.84; 'apparent': 0.91; 'rick': 0.93; 'fight': 0.97 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: python-list@python.org From: dieter Subject: Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2015 08:29:45 +0200 References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: pd9e09b25.dip0.t-ipconnect.de User-Agent: Gnus/5.1008 (Gnus v5.10.8) XEmacs/21.4.22 (linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:mHgM0akohNao+z08Sxd1mFvMyJQ= X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20+ Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Message-ID: Lines: 62 NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6 X-Trace: 1437373792 news.xs4all.nl 2927 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:41060 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:94213 Rick Johnson writes: > On Sunday, July 19, 2015 at 12:54:34 AM UTC-5, dieter wrote: >> From my point of view: if you want help with fixing bugs, >> you must ensure that there is a high probability that >> those contributions really find their way into the main >> development lines. As I understand from other messages in >> this thread, this is also a problem with Python bug >> fixing. > > (Not sure who said this, so my apologies if the attribution > is incorrect) > > Bug fixing is not something most programmers find enjoyable, > at least not for long durations. I prefer to spend my time > solving real world problems, and designing intuitive APIs, > this is what brings me joy. This was me. And I am like you. I do not hunt bugs I find in a bug tracker but only bugs I get hit in real world problems. But once hit, I usually find a solution (or work around) and like to share it with others who might get hit in the future. That's why I take the time to file bug reports (often with patches). But when those bug reports and patches seem to be ignored by the core development team - I look for other means, such as external packages. > Heck, there have been many times that i purposefully re- > invented the wheel simply because solving the problem is > much easier (and more enjoyable) than trying to understand > another programmer's atrocious spaghetti code. Therefor, we > should not be surprised that the bug list is so understaffed > and lacks vigor. In my experience (with other open source projects), I think almost none of my patches was ever taken over without modifications. In my view, the changes were usually of a cosmetic nature. For me, this is fine - as long as the problem gets fixed. > ... > What is becoming apparent to me though, is that most of the > complaints i had voiced (years ago) about the exclusive > attitudes, horrible interface, and the burdensome workflow > of submitting patches is contributing to the lack of > interest in this process -> and it seems i am not alone! > > I can remember twice getting excited about helping out, to > only quickly become frustrated with the politics and > interface. Why should i have to fight just to volunteer? Experience like this (in another project) causes me to be very reluctant to become a core contributor (in the sense of actively fixing things in the core). You need a lot of knowledge (coding conventions, test setup, change workflow, ...) whichs goes far beyond the functionality of the fix -- and you must be resilient, patient and maybe even fighting to get the work accepted.