I think you've made an excellent point, Ashraf. This really would solve the problem of "uninteresting" issues getting solved as well. We'd only have to find a way or relating votes and time. Some kind of rigorous and simple equation. Any experience/suggestion there?<div>
<div><br></div><div><br>
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 3:40 PM, Ashraf Amayreh <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:mistknight@gmail.com">mistknight@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
I kind of remember the solution in priority queues, the problem was<br>
starvation, when an issue just keeps being pushed back indefinitely.<br>
<br>
Adding age of issue creation as a factor in the issue exposure should<br>
make sure this problem doesn't happen. After some time even the most<br>
uninteresting issue will eventually float above all others because<br>
it's been there for long.<br>
<div><div></div><div class="Wj3C7c"><br>
On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 2:19 PM, Tomas Fulopp <<a href="mailto:tomi@vacilando.org">tomi@vacilando.org</a>> wrote:<br>
> The on-going debate of pros and cons of issue/post/patch voting or<br>
> subscription is largely hypothetical: neither camp has strong proofs they<br>
> are right. (It is further clouded by the other part of the patch delay<br>
> problem, which is lack of superbly experienced Drupal coders who actually<br>
> are able to understand and intelligently review the more complicated<br>
> patches.)<br>
> But remember the other reason to install at least subscription to individual<br>
> issues: we would get rid of all the "+1" and "subscribing" little posts that<br>
> plague many threads and make them hardly readable.<br>
> If then we had a way of selecting posts with patches sorted by number of<br>
> subscribers, we'd be able to see what patches are most sorely needed to be<br>
> reviewed and committed. Linking that to the d.o. menu would help a lot, too.<br>
> In 6 months we can evaluate whether or not such issue subscription sorting<br>
> helped the whole patch stalling situation. I believe it will, but even if it<br>
> won't, it will be extremely useful.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 10:28 AM, Vivek Puri <<a href="mailto:crystalcube@yahoo.com">crystalcube@yahoo.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> voting will not solve the problem , popularity factor is already one of<br>
>> causes of problem. The problem stems from lack of fair way of defining how<br>
>> critical a given issue is. Right now everything to do with D7 currently gets<br>
>> most attention, leaving the bugs in production releases with lack of<br>
>> attention from the community.<br>
>><br>
>> There should be a queue based on a factor which defines fairness something<br>
>> like this ,<br>
>> Secuity > known bug/patch > issue<br>
>> core > module<br>
>> Current Stable version ( 6) > last stable version (5) > development<br>
>> version (7)<br>
>><br>
>> Of course there is also a need for some kind of accountability as why a<br>
>> patch for a bug in production version has not been committed for x.y.z time<br>
>> period. But we can ignore that ...being an open source project ;) .<br>
>> Currently new release is favored over resolving bugs in current release.<br>
>><br>
><br>
><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</div></div><font color="#888888">--<br>
Ashraf Amayreh<br>
<a href="http://aamayreh.org" target="_blank">http://aamayreh.org</a><br>
</font></blockquote></div><br></div></div>