On Mon, 2012-01-23 at 11:00 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-01-23 at 07:42 +0100, David Tardon wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 12:27:10PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 08:16:31AM +0100, David Tardon wrote:
> > > > The libreoffice team uses this resol
On Mon, 2012-01-23 at 07:42 +0100, David Tardon wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 12:27:10PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 08:16:31AM +0100, David Tardon wrote:
> > > The libreoffice team uses this resolution for
> > >
> > > 1) bugs that are not reproducible, but we _
On Sat, 2012-01-21 at 12:33 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 06:31:44PM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > For the record, I am referencing
> > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/BugStatusWorkFlow#CLOSED
> >
> > Currently, the official bug lifecycle includes the fo
On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 08:16 +0100, David Tardon wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 06:31:44PM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > For the record, I am referencing
> > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/BugStatusWorkFlow#CLOSED
> >
> > Currently, the official bug lifecycle includes the followin
On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 07:42:57AM +0100, David Tardon wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 12:27:10PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 08:16:31AM +0100, David Tardon wrote:
> > > The libreoffice team uses this resolution for
> > >
> > > 1) bugs that are not reproducible, b
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 12:33:29PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 06:31:44PM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > For the record, I am referencing
> > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/BugStatusWorkFlow#CLOSED
> >
> > Currently, the official bug lifecycle includes
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 12:27:10PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 08:16:31AM +0100, David Tardon wrote:
> > The libreoffice team uses this resolution for
> >
> > 1) bugs that are not reproducible, but we _think_ we know what is the
> > cause (these are mostly "fire and
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 06:31:44PM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> For the record, I am referencing
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/BugStatusWorkFlow#CLOSED
>
> Currently, the official bug lifecycle includes the following phrase:
> "The resolution UPSTREAM can be used by maintainers t
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 08:16:31AM +0100, David Tardon wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 06:31:44PM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > For the record, I am referencing
> > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/BugStatusWorkFlow#CLOSED
> >
> > Currently, the official bug lifecycle includes the f
On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 09:30 +, Tim Waugh wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 08:39 +0100, Marcela Mašláňová wrote:
> > I use closed/upstream, when I already fixed it in upstream. This bug
> > should be closed with number of release, where it is fixed or with the
> > link to the commit. I wouldn't
* Ralf Corsepius [20/01/2012 19:53] :
>
> Surely the bug is open: The product you are supposed to be
> responsible for (A Fedora package) suffers from an unfixed bug,
> documented in bugzilla.
Anyone looking in brc for the unfixed bugs of a package is going to be severely
disappointed. Bugs there
On 01/20/2012 05:55 PM, Emmanuel Seyman wrote:
* Ralf Corsepius [20/01/2012 15:25] :
... and why no simply keep these BZs "open" and/or to add a note
Because the bug isn't open.
Surely the bug is open: The product you are supposed to be responsible
for (A Fedora package) suffers from an unfi
On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 11:24 -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Stephen Gallagher (sgall...@redhat.com) said:
> > Essentially, when closing this bug as UPSTREAM, we are communicating to
> > our users "This will get fixed. Probably. And it will get pulled into
> > Fedora eventually. Probably." Most peo
* Ralf Corsepius [20/01/2012 15:25] :
>
> ... and why no simply keep these BZs "open" and/or to add a note
Because the bug isn't open. There's nothing more to do on it in its present
state and having it show up in lists of open bugs is counter-productive.
> This would at least reflect the actual
On 20/01/12 16:24, Bill Nottingham wrote:
In that case, I will likely open up a bug upstream, and close the Fedora
bug, because it is really not up to me at all when, or *if*, such a bug gets
fixed; as a downstream maintainer, I'm not going to put changes of that sort
into Fedora alone, and upst
Stephen Gallagher (sgall...@redhat.com) said:
> Essentially, when closing this bug as UPSTREAM, we are communicating to
> our users "This will get fixed. Probably. And it will get pulled into
> Fedora eventually. Probably." Most people, when they can actually be
> convinced to file a real bug repo
On 20.1.2012 13:20, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
That's a fantastic idea, and probably an ideal solution. Unfortunately,
we're also talking about a minimum of several months' work to get that
in place, just on the engineering side. Not including the deployment
testing period.
Sure. Just to note tha
On Fri, 20 Jan 2012 07:20:20 -0500
Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> Well, the proposal I'm making is the one that I've been following
> personally in my own projects, which I feel is providing better
> service to my users.
Speaking as a (mostly) user: I agree with this statement. I would rather
have th
On 01/20/2012 02:04 PM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
- Original Message -
On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 09:30 +, Tim Waugh wrote:
We already had this discussion, I don't recall exactly - two years ago
and the resolution was similar - rename CLOSED UPSTREAM to HOLD UPSTREAM.
I can try to find it
On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 08:04 -0500, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> - Original Message -
> > On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 09:30 +, Tim Waugh wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 08:39 +0100, Marcela Mašláňová wrote:
> > > > I use closed/upstream, when I already fixed it in upstream. This
> > > > bug
> >
- Original Message -
> On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 09:30 +, Tim Waugh wrote:
> > On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 08:39 +0100, Marcela Mašláňová wrote:
> > > I use closed/upstream, when I already fixed it in upstream. This
> > > bug
> > > should be closed with number of release, where it is fixed or
> >
On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 09:30 +, Tim Waugh wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 08:39 +0100, Marcela Mašláňová wrote:
> > I use closed/upstream, when I already fixed it in upstream. This bug
> > should be closed with number of release, where it is fixed or with the
> > link to the commit. I wouldn't
On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 09:17 +0100, Matej Cepl wrote:
> On 20.1.2012 00:31, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > Currently, the official bug lifecycle includes the following phrase:
> > "The resolution UPSTREAM can be used by maintainers to denote a bug that
> > they expect to be fixed by upstream developme
On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 08:39 +0100, Marcela Mašláňová wrote:
> I use closed/upstream, when I already fixed it in upstream. This bug
> should be closed with number of release, where it is fixed or with the
> link to the commit. I wouldn't blame this state for not fixing bug in
> some projects. I g
On 01/20/2012 08:39 AM, Marcela Mašláňová wrote:
On 01/20/2012 12:31 AM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
I use closed/upstream, when I already fixed it in upstream. This bug
should be closed with number of release, where it is fixed or with the
link to the commit. I wouldn't blame this state for not
On 20.1.2012 00:31, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
Currently, the official bug lifecycle includes the following phrase:
"The resolution UPSTREAM can be used by maintainers to denote a bug that
they expect to be fixed by upstream development and naturally rolled
back into Fedora as part of the update pr
On 01/20/2012 12:31 AM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
For the record, I am referencing
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/BugStatusWorkFlow#CLOSED
Currently, the official bug lifecycle includes the following phrase:
"The resolution UPSTREAM can be used by maintainers to denote a bug that
they e
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 06:31:44PM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> For the record, I am referencing
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/BugStatusWorkFlow#CLOSED
>
> Currently, the official bug lifecycle includes the following phrase:
> "The resolution UPSTREAM can be used by maintainers t
On 01/20/2012 12:31 AM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
For the record, I am referencing
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/BugStatusWorkFlow#CLOSED
Currently, the official bug lifecycle includes the following phrase:
"The resolution UPSTREAM can be used by maintainers to denote a bug that
they e
For the record, I am referencing
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/BugStatusWorkFlow#CLOSED
Currently, the official bug lifecycle includes the following phrase:
"The resolution UPSTREAM can be used by maintainers to denote a bug that
they expect to be fixed by upstream development and natur
30 matches
Mail list logo
