Vitaliy Margolen wrote:
> I've spent enough time doing so and can tell that you are the first person
> to move _all bugs_ to "unknown" component. And leave them there.
That's a gratuitous conclusion, where did get that idea?
> And that
> all developers can't be expected to read every single b
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 6:22 PM, Vitaliy Margolen
wrote:
> On 01/21/2012 10:07 AM, Jerome Leclanche wrote:
>
>> I think that's the point Henri was trying to make. Most of these
>> components
>> are useless.
>>
>> Sure, you *can* pinpoint every component down, but as Henri said, if you
>> do
>> tha
On 01/21/2012 10:07 AM, Jerome Leclanche wrote:
I think that's the point Henri was trying to make. Most of these components
are useless.
Sure, you *can* pinpoint every component down, but as Henri said, if you do
that, what's most likely to happen is you end up writing a patch.
It's probably wo
I think that's the point Henri was trying to make. Most of these components
are useless.
Sure, you *can* pinpoint every component down, but as Henri said, if you do
that, what's most likely to happen is you end up writing a patch.
It's probably worth checking every category and remove the ones wi
Saulius Krasuckas wrote:
> > While keywords & components overlap, more generic components will not
> > overlap with specific ones. And if we name all of them
> > "unknown-something" that will help user / bugzilla triage people to pick
> > closer area for SMEs to do more detailed investigation.
* On Fri, 20 Jan 2012, Vitaliy Margolen wrote:
>
> While keywords & components overlap, more generic components will not
> overlap with specific ones. And if we name all of them
> "unknown-something" that will help user / bugzilla triage people to pick
> closer area for SMEs to do more detailed
On 21 January 2012 03:48, Vitaliy Margolen wrote:
> IMHO, it should be an additional component sound-general, or sound-unknown,
> or better yet "unknown-sound". There are many areas like that, that require
> investigation by a person with knowledge of said area to properly set
> component.
>
Yes,
On 01/20/2012 12:45 PM, Austin English wrote:
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 11:04, Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
Henri Verbeet wrote:
On 20 January 2012 17:25, Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
If the problem is sound related there are usually some known words in
the summary line describing the problem, why not
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 11:04, Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
> Henri Verbeet wrote:
>
>> On 20 January 2012 17:25, Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
>> > If the problem is sound related there are usually some known words in
>> > the summary line describing the problem, why not search for them? Why
>> > do you t
Henri Verbeet wrote:
> On 20 January 2012 17:25, Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
> > If the problem is sound related there are usually some known words in
> > the summary line describing the problem, why not search for them? Why
> > do you think inventing a new keyword and adding it to the buch of bugs
On 20 January 2012 17:25, Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
> If the problem is sound related there are usually some known words in
> the summary line describing the problem, why not search for them? Why
> do you think inventing a new keyword and adding it to the buch of bugs
> is easier that correctly form
Andrew Eikum wrote:
> > > Because then I can search for audio-related bugs where the component
> > > is not yet known.
> >
> > If the component is unknown probably there is no need to speculate about
> > the reasons and the source of the bug and investigate the problem instead?
> >
>
> I can't
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 10:40:53PM +0800, Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
> Andrew Eikum wrote:
>
> > > > Austin English wrote:
> > > > >If no one opposes in the next few days I'll add it/start tagging bugs.
> > > > I'm no more opposed to adding a pseudo-component. I simply
> > > > suggest naming it unk
Andrew Eikum wrote:
> > > Austin English wrote:
> > > >If no one opposes in the next few days I'll add it/start tagging bugs.
> > > I'm no more opposed to adding a pseudo-component. I simply
> > > suggest naming it unknown-audio or unknown-sound instead of
> > > "sound" such that people will hop
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 07:23:42PM +0800, Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
> joerg-cyril.hoe...@t-systems.com wrote:
>
> > Austin English wrote:
> > >If no one opposes in the next few days I'll add it/start tagging bugs.
> > I'm no more opposed to adding a pseudo-component. I simply
> > suggest naming it
joerg-cyril.hoe...@t-systems.com wrote:
> Austin English wrote:
> >If no one opposes in the next few days I'll add it/start tagging bugs.
> I'm no more opposed to adding a pseudo-component. I simply
> suggest naming it unknown-audio or unknown-sound instead of
> "sound" such that people will hope
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 9:49 AM, wrote:
> BTW, can I rename one of my saved searches?
>
Saving it as a different name (at the bottom of the page) does the trick.
> Thank you,
>Jörg Höhle
>
>
J. Leclanche
Hi,
Austin English wrote:
>If no one opposes in the next few days I'll add it/start tagging bugs.
I'm no more opposed to adding a pseudo-component. I simply
suggest naming it unknown-audio or unknown-sound instead of
"sound" such that people will hopefully still use the existing
quartz, mmdevapi,
Jerome Leclanche wrote:
> I see your point on printing but I disagree on it being "useless". If
> "proper printing" had been a 1.4 milestone, I'm sure whoever would have
> worked on it would find it wonderfully useful.
If somebody is lazy or clueless to set a proper bugzilla component, then
usin
I see your point on printing but I disagree on it being "useless". If
"proper printing" had been a 1.4 milestone, I'm sure whoever would have
worked on it would find it wonderfully useful.
J. Leclanche
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 9:35 AM, Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
> Austin English wrote:
>
> > I wo
Austin English wrote:
> I would say this is what components are for, though the point that
> pulseaudio/etc. bugs were filed as -unknown is valid.
>
> If no one opposes in the next few days I'll add it/start tagging bugs.
I'd oppose to adding yet another useless keyword just to avoid setting
ap
>> On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 1:09 AM, Jerome Leclanche wrote:
>>
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > Joerg and I exchanged a couple of emails where I proposed a "sound"
>> > keyword on bugzilla. Reasoning: there are multiple sound components, and
>>
; > Joerg and I exchanged a couple of emails where I proposed a "sound"
> > keyword on bugzilla. Reasoning: there are multiple sound components, and
> > most of the time, the correct component is unknown (or could even be caused
> > by non-sound components).
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > J. Leclanche
> >
>
Any comments?
J. Leclanche
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 1:09 AM, Jerome Leclanche wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Joerg and I exchanged a couple of emails where I proposed a "sound"
> keyword on bugzilla. Reasoning: there are multiple sound components, and
> most of the time, the correct
Hi,
Joerg and I exchanged a couple of emails where I proposed a "sound" keyword
on bugzilla. Reasoning: there are multiple sound components, and most of
the time, the correct component is unknown (or could even be caused by
non-sound components).
Thoughts?
J. Leclanche
25 matches
Mail list logo
