Just one note about "needs-volunteer". If the staff maintaining an extension don't have time to work on a problem, they may also not have time to review any changes relating to it.
If you do use this tag, I see this as an indication you are willing to take time to review any contributions relating to that task and do so until the task is seen to completion.
There is nothing I hate more than seeing volunteers submit patches to help the project and not getting any code review. Our volunteers are important.
On Wed, 3 Oct 2018 at 05:15 Derk-Jan Hartman d.j.hartman+wmf_ml@gmail.com wrote:
Another side effect of closing a ticket with Declined, is that it doesn't show up in search (because it's closed and closed tickets are omitted by default). But if the problem or desire for the feature still exists, it is likely to be reported again by users via a new ticket and other people then have to go duplicate hunting. So that creates more duplicates to weed through.
And when I work on something, I often take a look at boards and see if there is anything else in the same area that might need work, or I use the tickets to get a feeling of the direction that people want us to go. When declined is mixed with "we can't work on this right now", that makes it a lot harder to do that as well.
So i think Stalled is better. The problem with that can be that such tickets show up in workboards, which can create a lot of load in the browser if there are a lot of tickets. If we would tag all of such tickets with something like 'need-volunteer', a team could customise their work board filter to exclude all tickets with that tag. Or simply exclude the entire status, but then you cannot effectively use it within the team either. We do have to make that need-volunteer tag somewhat better defined in the bug lifecycle and the tag's description in that case. That tag started out more as an "opportunities for volunteers". Alternative is a new "no-resourcing" tag. or something.
DJ
On Wed, Oct 3, 2018 at 1:03 PM Amir Sarabadani ladsgroup@gmail.com wrote:
My two cents: I would personally make those type of tickets as "stalled", "stalled" basically for me means blocked and these type of tasks are blocked on
human
resources, some miracles might happen and we might end up having enough resources to unblock it but until that day it's stalled IMO.
OTOH there are tickets that we don't have resources to work on it and we never will, imagine a ticket with title "Rewrite mediawiki", it sounds
good
as lots of part of it is old but we will never have such resource to do
it.
IMO, we should call it declined on grounds of not having resources. Same goes for "Every user should have a personal private wiki": We don't have hardware resources for that and probably never will.
Best
On Wed, Oct 3, 2018 at 7:27 AM Pine W wiki.pine@gmail.com wrote:
I'm grateful for this largely civil and productive discussion. I'd like
to
suggest that the multiple sub-topics being discussed here might be
easier
to follow if the entire discussion is moved to a wiki talk page, such
as
on
MediaWiki.org. I am not attempting to halt discussion or to tell people
to
stop writing to the mailing list; moving to a wiki talk page is just a suggestion.
Thanks,
Pine ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine ) _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l