we have quite a few who either don't reply to any
>>> mail about their package, or who only reply after some nudging.
>>
>> Agreed, but OTOH I'd guess that half of all of the bugs reported on this
>> list are for just two packages: cygwin and setup.exe. ?If the maint
ir package, or who only reply after some nudging.
>
> Agreed, but OTOH I'd guess that half of all of the bugs reported on this
> list are for just two packages: cygwin and setup.exe. If the maintainers
> of those two packages think a bug tracker would be useful, we should make
On 19.08.2010 23:11, Eric Blake wrote:
On 08/19/2010 01:59 PM, Jeremy Bopp wrote:
Of course the quality of the defect tracker is directly related to the
effort the maintainers put in to keep it relatively pruned and
organized. Maybe that is too much to expect for most maintainers at
this time.
On 08/19/2010 01:59 PM, Jeremy Bopp wrote:
> Of course the quality of the defect tracker is directly related to the
> effort the maintainers put in to keep it relatively pruned and
> organized. Maybe that is too much to expect for most maintainers at
> this time.
Bingo. That's why I'm perfectly
;
> This seems like a terrible example to me. You seem to be expecting a bug
> tracker will be used for technical support so that if someone is having
> problems setting up openssh they will be walked through the problem in
> the bug tracker. I'd actually expect that a use
On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 01:26:03PM -0400, Andrew Schulman wrote:
>>On Aug 19 11:23, Andrew Schulman wrote:
>>>What is the status of http://cygwin.com/bugzilla? It appears to have
>>>been in use at least last year.
>>>
>>>Provisional effort? Occasionally used? Useful, not useful?
>>
>>Not used fo
On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 07:05:53PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>On Aug 19 11:23, Andrew Schulman wrote:
>> What is the status of http://cygwin.com/bugzilla? It appears to have been
>> in use at least last year.
>>
>> Provisional effort? Occasionally used? Useful, not useful?
>
>Not used for
On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 11:02:35AM -0500, Jeremy Bopp wrote:
>On 8/19/2010 10:18 AM, Andrew Schulman wrote:
>> (1) Most important: How many people care? Do users want a bug tracker?
>> Would package maintainers use it? Would the cygwin and setup.exe
>> maintainers use it?
&
On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 11:18:48AM -0400, Andrew Schulman wrote:
>> http://cygwin.com/acronyms/#SHTDI ?
>
>Auto-updating the package categories daily doesn't seem hard to me, I would
>build that if we had a bug tracker working.
>
>But before we get to that point, I&#x
> On Aug 19 11:23, Andrew Schulman wrote:
> > What is the status of http://cygwin.com/bugzilla? It appears to have been
> > in use at least last year.
> >
> > Provisional effort? Occasionally used? Useful, not useful?
>
> Not used for Cygwin, right now.
CGF was using it at least a little bit
On Aug 19 11:18, Andrew Schulman wrote:
> > http://cygwin.com/acronyms/#SHTDI ?
>
> Auto-updating the package categories daily doesn't seem hard to me, I would
> build that if we had a bug tracker working.
>
> But before we get to that point, I'd have a few
On Aug 19 11:23, Andrew Schulman wrote:
> What is the status of http://cygwin.com/bugzilla? It appears to have been
> in use at least last year.
>
> Provisional effort? Occasionally used? Useful, not useful?
Not used for Cygwin, right now.
Corinna
--
Corinna Vinschen Pleas
On 8/19/2010 10:18 AM, Andrew Schulman wrote:
> (1) Most important: How many people care? Do users want a bug tracker?
> Would package maintainers use it? Would the cygwin and setup.exe
> maintainers use it?
>
> Andrew Schulman and Bill Blunn would find a bug tracker useful, b
What is the status of http://cygwin.com/bugzilla? It appears to have been
in use at least last year.
Provisional effort? Occasionally used? Useful, not useful?
--
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation: http:/
> http://cygwin.com/acronyms/#SHTDI ?
Auto-updating the package categories daily doesn't seem hard to me, I would
build that if we had a bug tracker working.
But before we get to that point, I'd have a few other questions.
(1) Most important: How many people care? Do users want
mail about their package, or who only reply after some nudging.
>
> Agreed, but OTOH I'd guess that half of all of the bugs reported on this
> list are for just two packages: cygwin and setup.exe. If the maintainers
> of those two packages think a bug tracker would be useful, we sh
ing.
Agreed, but OTOH I'd guess that half of all of the bugs reported on this
list are for just two packages: cygwin and setup.exe. If the maintainers
of those two packages think a bug tracker would be useful, we should make
one. If they don't, it's probably not worth bothering.
>
On Aug 19 09:57, Andrew Schulman wrote:
> > It might be helpful if I could be clear what the reasons for not having
> > a bug tracker are.
> >
> > I could take a stab as:
> >
> > 1. It is not the feeling of the Cygwin maintainers that a bug tracker
>
On 19/08/2010 14:57, Andrew Schulman wrote:
I think that a bug tracker would be a nice improvement to our
development workflow. As a package maintainer, I'd love to be able to
call up a page of all of the open bugs for all of the packages I maintain.
I also think that the work to set u
> It might be helpful if I could be clear what the reasons for not having
> a bug tracker are.
>
> I could take a stab as:
>
> 1. It is not the feeling of the Cygwin maintainers that a bug tracker
> would provide a significantly better solution than the current mailing
&
s an interesting point. The thought had crossed my mind that I
could set up my own bug tracker, and that this might actually be useful
to the project.
To be sure, I had wondered if I could set up such a system and include a
moderate amount of advertising on the site and that this might prove to
21 matches
Mail list logo
