Hi Christian,
On 12/09/2013 03:28 PM, Schmitt, Christian wrote:
> Also just a question.. I currently looking forward to maybe contribute
> something back to django.
Great!
> But I always struggle with trac it looks so extremly messy.
Yeah, it takes some getting used to. If you'd like help with using Trac
or with the contribution process in general, you can always ask specific
questions here or on the django-core-mentorship mailing list:
https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/internals/mailing-lists/#django-core-mentorship
It may be possible to get the query you want by fiddling a bit, but I'd
advise simply ignoring the "owner" field in your query instead, because
in my experience that field isn't maintained consistently enough to be
useful for bulk querying in that way. I don't think this is so much a
matter of tooling choice as it is the difference between an OSS project
with a large volunteer community vs an in-house project with mostly paid
contributors. Frequently a contributor will claim an issue (set
themselves as owner) and then other life priorities take hold and they
stop working on the issue, but if nobody else takes particular interest
in that issue, the owner field doesn't get reset. So you'll find that
there are many issues that are open to being picked up by a new
contributor, even though they have an owner set. If there hasn't been
any activity in a number of months, you can just post a comment to the
ticket asking if there is still work in progress and saying that you
plan to start working on it. If you get no response you can feel free to
reassign it to yourself.
So I would focus more on finding an issue that interests you technically
or solves a problem you are facing (which will give you motivation to
work on it). The metadata needed for this query (component, mostly) does
tend to be well-maintained. I wouldn't worry about the owner field until
you are looking at the ticket and can see the full context of recent
activity. If it turns out someone else _is_ actively working on it, no
harm done, move on to a different one.
(Also, you might consider including in your queries tickets that _do_
have a patch but have the "patch needs improvement" flag - there are a
lot of these and they are in need of contributor love, too! Some tickets
are marked this way when what they really need is a whole new approach,
so you may still be largely writing a patch from scratch in this case.)
Carl