Hi
On Sat, Jul 25, 2015 at 1:15 PM, antonio montagnani wrote:
>
> no, I am not assuming that maintainers are paid, but when you are a
> volunteer you must be honest to you and other people to say when you cannot
> continue to be a volunteer
This is much more tricky than you apparently assume it
On Sat, Jul 25, 2015 at 11:02:11AM +0200, antonio montagnani wrote:
> I find really silly that when you are encharged of a bug, there is
> no kind of supervisor checking if you are are working on it and any
> problem arisingImagine it at Nasa, ehi guy, I have no time to
> check your bug and don
Roger Heflin ha scritto il 25/07/2015 alle 17:54:
You are assuming that the maintainers are employed/paid to maintain
that project. In quite a number of cases they are not paid for it, so
given that you may or may not get it fixed. And if I was a volunteer
for a project and my "supervisor" sta
On Sat, 25 Jul 2015 11:02:11 +0200
antonio montagnani wrote:
> I find really silly that when you are encharged of a bug, there is no
> kind of supervisor checking if you are are working on it and any
> problem arisingImagine it at Nasa, ehi guy, I have no time to
> check your bug and don't b
You are assuming that the maintainers are employed/paid to maintain
that project. In quite a number of cases they are not paid for it, so
given that you may or may not get it fixed. And if I was a volunteer
for a project and my "supervisor" started harassing me, then you would
need a new maintai
Chris Murphy ha scritto il 24/07/2015 alle 16:47:
On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 7:58 AM, Matthew Miller
wrote:
On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 08:36:05AM +0200, antonio montagnani wrote:
* If a package maintainer appears to be totally unresponsive to bug
reports, follow the process here:
https://fedorapro
On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 08:47:26AM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_nonresponsive_package_maintainers#Notes_for_invalid_email_addresses
> responsive |riˈspänsiv|
> adjective
> 1 reacting quickly and positively
> I'd say a maintainer who responds to an email s
On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 7:58 AM, Matthew Miller
wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 08:36:05AM +0200, antonio montagnani wrote:
>> >* If a package maintainer appears to be totally unresponsive to bug
>> >reports, follow the process here:
>> >
>> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_nonrespon
On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 08:36:05AM +0200, antonio montagnani wrote:
> >* If a package maintainer appears to be totally unresponsive to bug
> >reports, follow the process here:
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_nonresponsive_package_maintainers
> and when you contact him, you get the an
Matthew Miller ha scritto il 21/07/2015 alle 19:09:
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 06:53:12PM +0200, antonio montagnani wrote:
for my info, when a bug can be defined orphaned, i.e. which is the
grace period not to be sorpassed???
I don't know what sorpassed means. But
* When a Fedora release rea
Just for fun, here's one that originated in fedora 9 and is
still there:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=451562
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Fedora Code of Cond
On 07/21/2015 11:35 AM, Joe Zeff wrote:
On 07/21/2015 10:18 AM, jd1008 wrote:
I suspect that the bug is never fixed even in rel 2, nor do the lease
notes make any mention of the fix re: the automatically ignored bugs
from the previous rel.
When a bug is closed at EOL but still exists, you c
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 11:18:09AM -0600, jd1008 wrote:
> It seems like if bugs against rel 1 are still open just before EOL,
> and closed thereafter, AND, these bugs are no longer in rel 2,
> does release 2 have any document stating that the bugs was fixed?
Sometimes? Usually not.
> How can a u
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 10:20:32AM -0700, Joe Zeff wrote:
> >* When a Fedora release reaches end-of-life, bugs filed against that
> >release are automatically closed as "EOL". If you know that bug still
> >exists in a supported version, please reopen these and reassign them to
> >the current versio
On 07/21/2015 10:18 AM, jd1008 wrote:
I suspect that the bug is never fixed even in rel 2, nor do the lease
notes make any mention of the fix re: the automatically ignored bugs
from the previous rel.
When a bug is closed at EOL but still exists, you can reopen it and
change the version to a s
On 07/21/2015 10:09 AM, Matthew Miller wrote:
* When a Fedora release reaches end-of-life, bugs filed against that
release are automatically closed as "EOL". If you know that bug still
exists in a supported version, please reopen these and reassign them to
the current version or to rawhide.
You
On 07/21/2015 11:09 AM, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 06:53:12PM +0200, antonio montagnani wrote:
for my info, when a bug can be defined orphaned, i.e. which is the
grace period not to be sorpassed???
I don't know what sorpassed means. But
* When a Fedora release reaches
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 06:53:12PM +0200, antonio montagnani wrote:
> for my info, when a bug can be defined orphaned, i.e. which is the
> grace period not to be sorpassed???
I don't know what sorpassed means. But
* When a Fedora release reaches end-of-life, bugs filed against that
release ar
for my info, when a bug can be defined orphaned, i.e. which is the grace
period not to be sorpassed???
--
Antonio M
Skype: amontag52
Linux Fedora F22 (Twenty two)
on Fujitsu Lifebook A512
http://lugsaronno.altervista.org
http://campingmonterosa.altervista.org
--
users mailing list
users@lists.
19 matches
Mail list logo
