On Wed, 15 Sep 1999, Michael Stone wrote:
> How much trouble would it be to add another category--"unreproduced" or
> somesuch?
Yes, or `observational', `possible', that sort of thing. I agree.
--
Chris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ( http://www.fluff.org/chris )
On Wed, Sep 15, 1999 at 09:04:52PM +0200, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Previously David Welton wrote:
> > Sounds like an interesting idea - are you going to come up with some
> > code to demonstrate how things work?
> If people really want this I guess I could trivially add it to bugscan.
> It already
Le Wed, Sep 15, 1999 at 09:04:52PM +0200, Wichert Akkerman écrivait:
> If people really want this I guess I could trivially add it to bugscan.
> It already scans the BTS database twice a day anyway.
Not to mention, that a list of this kind does already exist here :
http://master.debian.org/~hertzo
Previously David Welton wrote:
> Sounds like an interesting idea - are you going to come up with some
> code to demonstrate how things work?
If people really want this I guess I could trivially add it to bugscan.
It already scans the BTS database twice a day anyway.
Wichert.
--
On Wed, Sep 15, 1999 at 03:55:43AM +0100, Chris Rutter wrote:
> I've had another early-morning idea. I think a metric called a "bug
> index" should be invented. It would be calculated like this: every
> severity of bug would be given a weight, say:
Sounds like an interesting idea - are you goin
On Wed, Sep 15, 1999 at 01:31:33PM +1000, Brian May wrote:
> - not sure you entirely believe bug report, but want to leave
> bug report open anyway, just in case. bug reports aren't
> always accurate, and it is possible that the reporter
> made a mistake, but cannot be verified as such
> by
On Wed, Sep 15, 1999 at 01:31:33PM +1000, Brian May wrote:
> - forgetting the bug exists - does this occur?
I thought Brian White's occasional "nag" messages were very effective
in this case. However several developers threaten to resign if anyone
ever suggests they were a good idea on this list.
7 matches
Mail list logo
