"Galen Charlton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 9:06 AM, MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > not a local configuration error. The flames from LibLimeys if I patch
> > a bug they've not experienced yet are *not* encouraging this
> > (TMPL_ELSIF MacOS X 10.5 unpredictability/
"Andrew Moore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Who or what is JOOI?
> > Just Out Of Interest. STFW. ;-)
>
> I did search the [fine] web, and I didn't come up with anything
> useful in the small amount of time I was interested in spending.
> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=define%3AJOOI&btnG=S
>> Who or what is JOOI?
>
> Just Out Of Interest. STFW. ;-)
I did search the fucking web, and I didn't come up with anything
useful in the small amount of time I was interested in spending.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=define%3AJOOI&btnG=Search
I'm interested in adding something to the w
"Andrew Moore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 9:06 AM, MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Yeah, please can people discuss such policy changes on -devel first?
>
> You bet. I should probably have discussed this more before editing.
> I'm still getting used to this concept wh
Hi,
On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 9:06 AM, MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think there SHOULD be a bug for every patch. However, there should
Obviously, we cannot mandate that every patch have a bug number, and
I'm not going to use that as a criteria for rejecting patches for 3.2.
However, this
On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 9:06 AM, MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yeah, please can people discuss such policy changes on -devel first?
You bet. I should probably have discussed this more before editing.
I'm still getting used to this concept where all edits of the wiki
need to be vetted by the
Paul POULAIN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I see a change in the wiki : [...]
Yeah, please can people discuss such policy changes on -devel first?
Or at least tell us. I read http://owu.towers.org.uk/planets/koha/
most days, but not everyone does. What's the point of changing policy
silently? It
Hi Paul -
On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 8:54 AM, Paul POULAIN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> It does sometimes seem like a long process, especially compared to a
>> small patch. Could we make it easier by making bugzilla accept entries
>> via email?
>
> mmm... maybe a good way to do so.
I'll follow up o
Andrew Moore a écrit :
>> For at least 2 reasons :
>> - it is an obviously "long" process to add a bug. If we have found a
>> small & quickly fixed bug, then there is no need to add a bug imo.
>> Having a complete patch comment is necessary for the ppl
>> reviewing/validating the patch. But the nee
Andrew Moore a écrit :
> On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 8:32 AM, Paul POULAIN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Everybody is against me it seems, so I think i'll accept & change my mind...
>
> I apologize, Paul. I was specifically trying to avoid having you feel that
> way.
You will see that our mails have
On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 8:32 AM, Paul POULAIN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Everybody is against me it seems, so I think i'll accept & change my mind...
I apologize, Paul. I was specifically trying to avoid having you feel that way.
-Andy
___
Koha-devel
Galen Charlton a écrit :
> But we don't get the benefit of your wisdom if the bug description and
> history is locked away in your internal bugs database. :) LibLime
> also has an internal bugs database, but that's mostly for truly
> internal stuff;
We too. But you must know that sometimes a cust
On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 7:03 AM, Paul POULAIN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I fully agree with the idea of pointing the bug if there is one. But I
> strongly disagree about adding a bug if there is none.
Hi Paul -
Thanks for the feedback. I'm glad you're on board with putting bug
numbers in the gi
Hi
On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 7:03 AM, Paul POULAIN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> For at least 2 reasons :
> - it is an obviously "long" process to add a bug. If we have found a
> small & quickly fixed bug, then there is no need to add a bug imo.
Small bug = quick description, therefore less time to
> Comments welcomed
It's a good rule because it helps RM to validate, test and apply patches.
But not only. There is another advantage: it helps identifying already
submitted bugs and comments/solution. It avoid investigating bugs
already solved. I have an example...
Yesterday, someone on ko
Hello world,
I see a change in the wiki :
"
Contributors to Koha are encouraged to reference a bug number with every
commit. This helps us determine the purpose of the commit and
establishes a more searchable and understandable history. If there is no
bug open at [[http://bugs.koha.org|bugs.koh
16 matches
Mail list logo
