[gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-project] [project] Re: [RFC] some global useflags

On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 4:42 AM, Steve Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ryan Hill wrote: >> Steve Long wrote: >>> Ciaran McCreesh wrote: >>> > Steve Long wrote: >>> >> > Have a look at, for example, [1], where Mike already gave you an >>> >> > answer one of the previous times we discussed it. >>>

[gentoo-dev] Automated Package Removal and Addition Tracker, for the week ending 2008-10-19 23h59 UTC

The attached list notes all of the packages that were added or removed from the tree, for the week ending 2008-10-19 23h59 UTC. Removals: app-cdr/mp3burn 2008-10-14 02:24:18 darkside Additions: kde-misc/kvkbd 2008-10-13 18:50:16 yngwin kde-

Re: [gentoo-dev] [v4] Planning for automatic assignment computation of bugs

On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 12:43:05PM -0700, Robin H. Johnson wrote: > On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 03:49:35PM +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > > > On Sat, 18 Oct 2008, Robin H Johnson wrote: > > > > > 3. If you want the default assignment to go to a maintainer, and NOT > > >the herd, move the elem

Re: [gentoo-dev] [v4] Planning for automatic assignment computation of bugs

On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 12:32:44PM -0700, Alec Warner wrote: > What if my herd email address is different from my bugzie address? > Can I have both in herds.xml? What if my herd address *isn't* a > bugzie account, will the world end? I don't know any herd where the herd email is not the same as th

Re: [gentoo-dev] [v4] Planning for automatic assignment computation of bugs

On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 03:49:35PM +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > > On Sat, 18 Oct 2008, Robin H Johnson wrote: > > > 3. If you want the default assignment to go to a maintainer, and NOT > >the herd, move the element further down in the metadata.xml! > > I disagree about this point. IMHO

Re: [gentoo-dev] [v4] Planning for automatic assignment computation of bugs

On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 08:47:15AM -0500, Jeremy Olexa wrote: > Robin H. Johnson wrote: >> Notes: >> -- >> 1. For handling no-herd, we should add an entry into >> herds.xml to >>catch it (maintainer-needed g.o). Every herd listed in an ebuild >> MUST be in >>herds.xml. > As rbu point

Re: [gentoo-dev] [v4] Planning for automatic assignment computation of bugs

On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 03:29:46PM +0200, Robert Buchholz wrote: > > 5. Javascript then appends the server results into the "Additional > >Comments" box: a suggested assignee and suggested CC values, with > > logic as to why. > > 6. The wrangler can copy and paste the data into the fields, edit

Re: [gentoo-dev] [v4] Planning for automatic assignment computation of bugs

On Sat, Oct 18, 2008 at 11:01 PM, Robin H. Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Now into it's Nth great year, I bring you the fourth edition of the > automatic assignment proposal. > > Previously: > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/48485 [v1] > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.g

Re: [gentoo-dev] [v4] Planning for automatic assignment computation of bugs

> On Sat, 18 Oct 2008, Robin H Johnson wrote: > 3. If you want the default assignment to go to a maintainer, and NOT >the herd, move the element further down in the metadata.xml! I disagree about this point. IMHO the procedure described in

Re: [gentoo-dev] [v4] Planning for automatic assignment computation of bugs

Robin H. Johnson wrote: Notes: -- 1. For handling no-herd, we should add an entry into herds.xml to catch it (maintainer-needed g.o). Every herd listed in an ebuild MUST be in herds.xml. As rbu pointed out, this is slightly incorrect. Most of my ebuilds contain no-herd. ;) As do ot

Re: [gentoo-dev] [v4] Planning for automatic assignment computation of bugs

On Sunday 19 October 2008, Robin H. Johnson wrote: > Now into it's Nth great year, I bring you the fourth edition of the > automatic assignment proposal. Yay! > 5. Javascript then appends the server results into the "Additional >Comments" box: a suggested assignee and suggested CC values, wi

[gentoo-dev] [project] Re: [RFC] some global useflags

Ryan Hill wrote: > Steve Long wrote: >> Ciaran McCreesh wrote: >> > Steve Long wrote: >> >> > Have a look at, for example, [1], where Mike already gave you an >> >> > answer one of the previous times we discussed it. >> >> > >> >> I'm aware of the prior discussion. >> >> Re-read it, and tell me wha

[gentoo-dev] Re: [Bug 204440] app-office/ical-2.2.1 fails with FEATURES="test userpriv"

Hello Gentoo Devs While investigating bug 204440, I found that FEATURES=userpriv and X11-based tests are incompatible. It was suggested that I raise the issue here, in a hope that someone has a suggestion or solution, other than RESTRICT=test for these (and other affected) ebuilds. Can anyone sug