On Sun, 11 Apr 2010 01:41:34 +0300
Petteri Räty wrote:
> On 04/11/2010 01:38 AM, Ryan Hill wrote:
> >
> > You ignored my point about this being completely moot once we start using
> > flags in bugzilla for arch teams. We'll have to change the policy then
> > to the maintainer being the assignee
On 04/11/2010 01:38 AM, Ryan Hill wrote:
>
> You ignored my point about this being completely moot once we start using
> flags in bugzilla for arch teams. We'll have to change the policy then
> to the maintainer being the assignee anyways.
>
Then we will do it when that happens.
Regards,
Pette
On Sat, 27 Mar 2010 16:26:46 +0200
Petteri Räty wrote:
> On 03/12/2010 09:18 PM, Petteri Räty wrote:
> > There seems to be two different schools on who to assign a keywording
> > bug with only a single arch. I have myself assigned it to the arch in
> > question but there's a difference of opinion
Alec Warner wrote:
> Could we generate a bugzilla search for arch teams? Do arch teams
> already use existing bugzilla functionality?
At least when i was with the ppc team, we had a bugzie search. And
bugzie already sorts your query for you. I guess it could be made to
only show keyword=STABLEREQ
On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 4:45 PM, Torsten Veller wrote:
> * Petteri Räty :
>> So let's summarize for assigning to the single arch:
>
>> In support (and my comments in support):
>> - Can be used as a gentle reminder for slacker arches
>
> And if not "only one arch" or "single arch" is slacking?
> I
* Petteri Räty :
> So let's summarize for assigning to the single arch:
> In support (and my comments in support):
> - Can be used as a gentle reminder for slacker arches
And if not "only one arch" or "single arch" is slacking?
I guess you would find another gentle way to remind them.
How abou
On Sun, 14 Mar 2010 11:21:13 +0200
Petteri Räty wrote:
> You misunderstood what I meant. The action I am talking about is
> reopening the bug. Any developer who notices that a bug should be
> reopened should reopen it so it gets noticed.
Sorry, my mistake.
--
fonts,
On 03/14/2010 10:56 AM, Ryan Hill wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 19:07:41 +0200
> Petteri Räty wrote:
>
>> When a bug is marked as fixed it doesn't show up in searches developers
>> use so it's a matter of who reads the email and acts upon it. I don't
>> see why maintainers would be any more likely
On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 19:07:41 +0200
Petteri Räty wrote:
> When a bug is marked as fixed it doesn't show up in searches developers
> use so it's a matter of who reads the email and acts upon it. I don't
> see why maintainers would be any more likely to act than an arch team
> comprised of multiple
Samuli Suominen posted on Sat, 13 Mar 2010 19:21:52 +0200 as excerpted:
> On 03/13/2010 07:07 PM, Petteri Räty wrote:
>> When a bug is marked as fixed it doesn't show up in searches developers
>> use so it's a matter of who reads the email and acts upon it. I don't
>> see why maintainers would be
Ryan Hill wrote:
> I can't find it any more, but that's probably where this idea came
> from. It never really made sense to me but I've done it on several occasions.
me too. I guess it's been handed down for ages.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 21:18:03 +0200
Petteri Räty wrote:
> There seems to be two different schools on who to assign a keywording
> bug with only a single arch. I have myself assigned it to the arch in
> question but there's a difference of opinion here:
> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2721
12 matches
Mail list logo
