From owner-freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Fri Dec 1 10:44:37 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E411DDFB5FC; Fri, 1 Dec 2017 10:44:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from srs0=okcb=c5=freebsd.org=kp@codepro.be) Received: from venus.codepro.be (venus.codepro.be [IPv6:2a01:4f8:162:1127::2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.codepro.be", Issuer "Gandi Standard SSL CA 2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AF14D7AABE; Fri, 1 Dec 2017 10:44:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from srs0=okcb=c5=freebsd.org=kp@codepro.be) Received: from [172.16.5.2] (vega.codepro.be [IPv6:2a01:4f8:162:1127::3]) (Authenticated sender: kp) by venus.codepro.be (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 948FC4082A; Fri, 1 Dec 2017 11:44:34 +0100 (CET) From: "Kristof Provost" To: "Mike Remski" Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, "Dieter BSD" , freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Getting PRs fixed [ was: Re: The future of fortune(6) ] Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2017 11:44:31 +0100 X-Mailer: MailMate (2.0BETAr6098) Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <1306478885.37537.1512123855297@connect.xfinity.com> References: <1306478885.37537.1512123855297@connect.xfinity.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.25 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2017 10:44:38 -0000 On 1 Dec 2017, at 11:24, Mike Remski wrote: > Bug databases need to be scrubbbed periodically. Even if it's just to > close ones that can't be reproduced or have been fixed by other > changes (after due diligence in verifying it so there is no absurd > excuse). > > There are a lot of foks with the ability and desire to help, fixing > PRs and sending in patches should be a good way to involved, but that > still depends on the owner of a piece to look at a patch, ask > questions, get revisions and commit it. If that never happens or the > submitter never gets any feedback, it winds up discouraging the new > people. > > Fixing bugs, espeically on !CURRENT, is not glamorous, but necessary. > Often actually root causing the bug and patching it gives one a better > understanding of the overall system and a sense of satisfaction. > > Yes, I realize that everyone is a volunteer and has a real life, but > at least acknowledging a submission should be done, even if it is > automated. This goes both ways: originator of a bug (or patch) needs > to be responsive to the FreeBSD committer if they request more data or > clarification. > Good bug reports are enormously valuable. A bug report with a clear reproduction scenario is vastly more likely to get fixed (quickly). My own experience is that usually I spend more time on trying to reproduce the problem than actually fixing it. Sometimes by orders of magnitude. Patches are fantastic, but a bug report with a simple reproduction scenario is often just as good (and sometimes even better). Regards, Kristof