> yet another feature request or two to be lost to a mailing list thread
> along those lines:
>
> Maintainer or not i'd like to be able to setup triggers so that i'm
> automatically cc'ed on any bugs matching a simple search query i
> specify.
Please add that to the meta tracker (if you really wa
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
>> +lots on adding a module field (independent of automatically adding
>> maintainers to the nosy list, it would assist in "I just did a major
>> cleanup of module X, are there any old bugs I can kill off").
>
> Link (1:1) or Multilink (1:n)? What is the impact on the Compon
On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 1:49 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> Brett Cannon wrote:
>> Another summit, another potential time to see if people want to change
>> anything about the issue tracker. I would bring up:
>>
>> - Dropping Stage in favor of some keywords (e.g. 'needs unit test',
>> 'needs docs')
>>
>> ... it seems to me that some integration between the issue tracker
>> and Rietveld would be beneficial.
Martin> See
Martin> http://psf.upfronthosting.co.za/roundup/meta/issue247
Cool. I still haven't used Rietveld for anything, though I am getting
comfortable with Review Boar
s...@pobox.com wrote:
> Brett> Another summit, another potential time to see if people want to
> Brett> change anything about the issue tracker.
>
> I have no idea how hard this would be to implement and won't be at the
> language summit to formally present the idea, but it seems to me tha
> +lots on adding a module field (independent of automatically adding
> maintainers to the nosy list, it would assist in "I just did a major
> cleanup of module X, are there any old bugs I can kill off").
Link (1:1) or Multilink (1:n)? What is the impact on the Component field?
Would you be willi
Antoine Pitrou writes:
> Besides, the more keywords there are, the messier it is.
That's what I've found in the XEmacs tracker. Keywords are a
reasonable way (in the context of the Roundup implementation) to test
new classifications before going to the effort of messing with the
page templates.
Brett> Another summit, another potential time to see if people want to
Brett> change anything about the issue tracker.
I have no idea how hard this would be to implement and won't be at the
language summit to formally present the idea, but it seems to me that some
integration between the i
Le Thu, 22 Oct 2009 21:47:06 -0700, Brett Cannon a écrit :
>
> - Dropping Stage in favor of some keywords (e.g. 'needs unit test',
> 'needs docs')
What would it bring? We don't have a very strict process and the current
"stage" looks sufficient to me. Saying that unit tests or docs are
lacking
Brett Cannon wrote:
> Another summit, another potential time to see if people want to change
> anything about the issue tracker. I would bring up:
>
> - Dropping Stage in favor of some keywords (e.g. 'needs unit test',
> 'needs docs')
> - Adding a freestyle text box to delineate which, if any, std
Brett Cannon writes:
> Another summit, another potential time to see if people want to change
> anything about the issue tracker.
It requires some coding, but I see OpenID authentication support
http://issues.roundup-tracker.org/issue2550523> to be important for
lowering the barrier to getting b
Another summit, another potential time to see if people want to change
anything about the issue tracker. I would bring up:
- Dropping Stage in favor of some keywords (e.g. 'needs unit test', 'needs
docs')
- Adding a freestyle text box to delineate which, if any, stdlib module is
the cause of a bug
12 matches
Mail list logo
