1+
I apologize for the messy way of transferring the issues, but there's no better alternative. There are lots more games coming, so we decided to move these issues to the new project to make things more manageable for us. Please bear with us as we adapt our tools to work with the large interest we've seen in the Linux products.
Every person who commented on or filed an issue has been at-mentioned in the corresponding issue on the other end and so they should have been notified (and possibly subscribed) to the new issue.
This is a one-time measure that we won't repeat, but we decided it was the best path to be able to manage these bugs. There were about 700 open bugs in steam-for-linux, and only about 140 of them were moved.
@jorgenpt did you attempt to contact to github to see if they'd be willing to help transfer the issues between repos?
@jorgenpt: Sorry, but your justification isn't acceptable for me. Creating just SINGLE tracking issue just referencing to the original one (while keeping the original open) would be MUCH cleaner solution. What you did is just crap.
we decided to move these issues to the new project to make things more manageable for us
I understand, but it'd be much better to only let new issues be created in appropriate repository.
@damianb, no, I did not think anyone would be exceptionally upset about it. The only data that was truly lost were the cross-references. Every user who had subscribed to a previous issue should have been notified about the move due to the cross-reference to the new issue and the comment. I apologize for the hassle for you to resubscribe to the new issue and possibly for having to set up new references if they were important to the bug, but I don't think we'll spend any more time on this.
@Majkl578, I am sorry it is not acceptable to you, but we have limited resources, and we'd rather not spend more than we have to on managing our issue tracker. Doing any more changes to the issue transfer now will cause a) a lot more noise in the actual reports and b) consume even more time. Wouldn't you rather we spend our time actually fixing the bugs in question?
@jorgenpt considering it would take far less work to just open up "mirror issues" on the new repo (which would just refer to the old issue, possibly copy only the original contents or quote them) and not spending time scripting something to rip every comment and repost it in the new issue, your logic here seems to contradict his alternative. Wouldn't you rather spend time fixing bugs instead of scripting something to copypaste comments across repositories?
@damianb, we would still have to create 150 issues by hand, or script that process, and then we'd a) make it noisier for the Steam for Linux engineers, b) have to check both the new issue and the original issue for additional comments, and c) close issues in two places.
There simply isn't a person whose sole responsibility is to manage the bug tracker, so we have to take some shortcuts like these. We greatly value your contributions, and I'm sorry that I upset you by doing this.
but we have limited resources, and we'd rather not spend more than we have to on managing our issue tracker
I wonder why you didn't ask community to help you? I am definitely sure there would be at least one person interested in helping you (both Valve and Steam for Linux itself) with this (= managing BT).
Doing any more changes to the issue transfer now will cause a) a lot more noise in the actual reports and b) consume even more time.
Sure, that's why you should had been thinking about consequences before you actually realized it.
Wouldn't you rather we spend our time actually fixing the bugs in question?
Yes, I would. But then there comes a question into my mind: Why did you actually do this? From the view of time spent on it, keeping current issues untouched would definitely cost minimum time.
a) make it noisier for the Steam for Linux engineers
Noisier in what way?
b) have to check both the new issue and the original issue for additional comments
It would be easily eliminated by explicitly saying that one issue is only a reference to the original one. Still better than this.
And I am sorry to disappoint you, but now you have to check for additional comments too.
c) close issues in two places
Closing two issues instead of one is really no more than 3 seconds more (7.5 minutes for all 150 issues).
All of this is obviously short term, only until these bugs get fixed. I think that small amout of extra work is much less pain than this madness you've done.
And there is one more thing, I actually don't think having you as author of all the duplicated issues & comments is good idea. It seems just fundamentally wrong (or maybe selfish) to me.
And by the way, here is one of the (first) consequences of your half-baked idea: https://github.com/ValveSoftware/steam-for-linux/issues/1783#issuecomment-13645293
@Majkl578 not the only one either now. https://github.com/ValveSoftware/steam-for-linux/issues/19#issuecomment-13689987
I can understand why people are frustrated, but please, keep it civil.
Today, @jorgenpt did something he called "transferring issues" when he closed hunders of issues and duplicated their contents into another repo.
This was really bad and ugly solution, which messed everything up and caused serious problems. To name some of the serious:
You really fu**ed this up. Please, revert all these changes made by @jorgenpt (that's pretty simple, just reopen closed issues by him and remove his comments). If you want to do something like this, please, find a proper way. If you're not able to do it properly, ask GitHub for help or do not do it at all.
Thanks.