Jakub Narebski wrote:
On Tue, 13 May 2008, Sverre Rabbelier wrote:
On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 3:07 PM, Jakub Narebski <jnareb@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
[on helping maintainer decide how closely patch should be examined]
Weighting different statistics, bayesian hypotesis/filtering, expert
system, machine learning... I guess that would be quite a work to do
it well. Probably would require to calculate and adjust scoring of code
(difficulity) and authors (skill), and matching them...
This is certainly in the "wishlist" scope.
Yeah, I think it would go in the 'c' of 'MoSCoW', but it could be very
useful when done right.
Errr... what do you mean by 'MoSCoW'?
Must have
Should have
Could have
Won't have
It's a priority scheme used in agile development techniques, where
developers, customers and users work close together. The customer
decides "must have this, or we scrap this project", "should have this,
or users will be unhappy", "could have this, many would appreciate it"
and "won't have this, it's too expensive to develop" after the devs
have estimated the time required to develop the individual components.
Agile development is usually used to go under-feature instead of
over-budget. Since opensource projects are more driven by whatever
passing-by developers happen to find interesting (or annoying) at the
moment (nearly as predictable as Brownian motion), agile development
techniques are very rarely used successfully to develop oss in
anything but extremely tight communities.
--
Andreas Ericsson andreas.ericsson@xxxxxx
OP5 AB www.op5.se
Tel: +46 8-230225 Fax: +46 8-230231
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
