Santiago Vila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, 1 Jun 1999, Joey Hess wrote:
> > A reccommendation would be fine. Perhaps it'd be more suited to go in the
> > developers reference than in policy?
> Yes.
>
> It is not needed that whatever we write about this is "normative", I just
> would li
On Wed, Jun 02, 1999 at 11:05:19AM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> It is not needed that whatever we write about this is "normative", I just
> would like to see some sort of "guidance".
Amazing. Well, at least we now have evidence that there is such a thing as
this distinction.
--
G. Branden Robi
On Tue, 1 Jun 1999, Joey Hess wrote:
> Santiago Vila wrote:
> > Well, if we had some sort of policy (or even recommendation) to just avoid
> > (or try to avoid) the extreme cases (without reaching to "oppression"),
> > would things be worse than now?
>
> A reccommendation would be fine. Perhaps i
Santiago Vila wrote:
> Well, if we had some sort of policy (or even recommendation) to just avoid
> (or try to avoid) the extreme cases (without reaching to "oppression"),
> would things be worse than now?
A reccommendation would be fine. Perhaps it'd be more suited to go in the
developers referen
On Mon, May 31, 1999 at 01:56:07PM -0700, Joey Hess wrote:
> Santiago Vila wrote:
> > Well, what I would like to see is a general policy about bugs, covering
> > all aspects of bug reporting, forwarding, severitying and closing. Who is
> > allowed to do that, and when. For example, how many times a
> On Tue, 1 Jun 1999, Julian Gilbey wrote:
>
> > Santiago Vila wrote:
> > > Well, what I would like to see is a general policy about bugs, covering
> > > all aspects of bug reporting, forwarding, severitying and closing. Who is
> > > allowed to do that, and when. For example, how many times are a
On Tue, Jun 01, 1999 at 05:34:48PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
>
> I think this is better viewed in absolute terms.
>
> 38 reopening-reclosing flamewars in the BTS are too much.
> Very often is the *reopening* of a bug what makes the maintainer to be
> upset, not the fact that the submitter disag
On Tue, Jun 01, 1999 at 05:34:48PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
>
> > Let's try to focus on the real problems. Social complications are seldom
> > solved by oppression.
>
> Well, if we had some sort of policy (or even recommendation) to just avoid
> (or try to avoid) the extreme cases (without rea
On Tue, 1 Jun 1999, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 01, 1999 at 11:52:59AM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> > >
> > > No, we just need some common sense, common courtesy (which none of us
> > > seem to be so good at ;), some good relaxation techniques and some
> > > good interpersonal skills.
On Tue, Jun 01, 1999 at 11:52:59AM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> >
> > No, we just need some common sense, common courtesy (which none of us
> > seem to be so good at ;), some good relaxation techniques and some
> > good interpersonal skills.
>
> My experience says this is not enough.
Please don
On Tue, 1 Jun 1999, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> Santiago Vila wrote:
> > Well, what I would like to see is a general policy about bugs, covering
> > all aspects of bug reporting, forwarding, severitying and closing. Who is
> > allowed to do that, and when. For example, how many times are a submitter
>
> Julian Gilbey wrote:
> > Now that we have a "fixed" priority in the developers-reference (this
> > is not in policy itself), can this proposal be closed?
>
> Your quote is not sufficient for me to decide.
My quote was the entire bug report (except for signatures). Your
decision: it's your bug
> On Mon, 31 May 1999, Julian Gilbey wrote:
>
> > Now that we have a "fixed" priority in the developers-reference (this
> > is not in policy itself), can this proposal be closed?
>
> Well, what I would like to see is a general policy about bugs, covering
> all aspects of bug reporting, forwarding
Santiago Vila wrote:
> Well, what I would like to see is a general policy about bugs, covering
> all aspects of bug reporting, forwarding, severitying and closing. Who is
> allowed to do that, and when. For example, how many times are a submitter
> allowed to reopen a bug (I would say that only onc
Julian Gilbey wrote:
> Now that we have a "fixed" priority in the developers-reference (this
> is not in policy itself), can this proposal be closed?
Your quote is not sufficient for me to decide.
Regards,
Joey
--
Unix is user friendly ... It's just picky about its friends.
Please al
On Mon, 31 May 1999, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> Now that we have a "fixed" priority in the developers-reference (this
> is not in policy itself), can this proposal be closed?
Well, what I would like to see is a general policy about bugs, covering
all aspects of bug reporting, forwarding, severitying
Now that we have a "fixed" priority in the developers-reference (this
is not in policy itself), can this proposal be closed?
Julian
> Package: debian-policy
> Version: 7 Apr 1998 18:59:29 +0100
>
> I think this needs clarification. There is a problem with non-active
> maintainers or maintai
17 matches
Mail list logo
