On Thu, 08 Aug 2013 16:30:50 +1000
Michael Palimaka wrote:
> On 8/08/2013 07:52, Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote:
> > Guys, please, if you want to bikeshed about bug summary, please do
> > it in a constructive way and get the automated bug assignment
> > project going.
> I think at least one bug wran
On 8/08/2013 07:52, Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote:
Guys, please, if you want to bikeshed about bug summary, please do it in
a constructive way and get the automated bug assignment project going.
I think at least one bug wrangler already uses a local script to do
something similar to that.
Any id
On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 10:23 AM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
> Possibly, but it be just another experiment waiting in a slowly
> progressing queue; the one the CVS --> Git move is in. We have to be
> fair, while experiments are neat and all that; they have hardly became
> successful lately, it's as if our
On Wed, 7 Aug 2013 16:23:22 +0200
Tom Wijsman wrote:
> > If you have strong feelings and want to contribute to how bugs are
> > managed, join the bug wranglers.
>
> Asked several times to be added, I'm still not listed;
This appears to have been a communication problem, in specific with
what th
On Wed, 7 Aug 2013 09:46:49 -0400
Rich Freeman wrote:
> Having two bug wrangler projects whose main function ends up being
> fighting revert wars over subject line formatting and writing policies
> denouncing the other project is counter-productive.
Whether you have two individuals or two projec
On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 8:55 AM, Michael Palimaka wrote:
> On 7/08/2013 22:41, hasufell wrote:
>>
>> You are a bug wrangler and should have the
>> authority to mess with anything in bugzilla.
>
> Don't forget that anybody can start a project, even if it conflicts with
> other projects. While Jeroen
On Wed, 07 Aug 2013 22:55:45 +1000
Michael Palimaka wrote:
> On 7/08/2013 22:41, hasufell wrote:
> > You are a bug wrangler and should have the
> > authority to mess with anything in bugzilla.
>
> Don't forget that anybody can start a project, even if it conflicts
> with other projects. While Je
On Wed, 07 Aug 2013 22:45:55 +1000
Michael Palimaka wrote:
> On 7/08/2013 22:18, Tom Wijsman wrote:
> > We usually take it a step further, putting the actual error there;
> > if the maintainer reads the error, it will be clear it failed to
> > build:
> >
> > "=kde-base/kmail-4.8.10 with GCC 4.8 -
On 7/08/2013 22:41, hasufell wrote:
You are a bug wrangler and should have the
authority to mess with anything in bugzilla.
Don't forget that anybody can start a project, even if it conflicts with
other projects. While Jeroen's experience certainly gives him a more
insight regarding bugzilla
On 7/08/2013 22:18, Tom Wijsman wrote:
We usually take it a step further, putting the actual error there; if
the maintainer reads the error, it will be clear it failed to build:
"=kde-base/kmail-4.8.10 with GCC 4.8 - File:Line:Char: Error: Reason"
Is there any benefit to adding = in this case?
On 7/08/2013 07:46, Jeroen Roovers wrote:
Besides the finer technical points of bug maintenance, it simply
infuriates me that anyone would think of bug reports in the possessive.
This is not the way to improve the distro. You're on the wrong track
there. And you weren't being friendly.
In this ca
On 7/08/2013 20:34, Kacper Kowalik wrote:
* every atom needs a "=" in front, and
* "Please stabilize XXX" should always be replaced by "XXX stabilization".
Those two are actually useful. There are many scripts used by ATs that
parse title field. One could argue: "Fix your damn scripts" but in t
12 matches
Mail list logo
