1 |
On Fri, 2008-06-13 at 16:38 +0200, Fabian Groffen wrote: |
2 |
> On 13-06-2008 15:35:25 +0100, Alan Hourihane wrote: |
3 |
> > Sorry Jeremy, I realise that it's part of a patch that failed. What I |
4 |
> > failed to understand is why Fabian decided to cut & paste the import |
5 |
> > process and show that something failed patching did an edit on it and |
6 |
> > then further went on to commit it. |
7 |
> > |
8 |
> > It'd be much easier to understand if Fabian just said "o.k. done, but |
9 |
> > it's untested". |
10 |
> |
11 |
> I thought maybe people are interested to know how I just do it, and |
12 |
> figure out if they can do that themselves too. It helps us when someone |
13 |
> can tell "I did this, and it works after that", where "this" and "that" |
14 |
> are things we know (command, patch). |
15 |
|
16 |
Well, if that's the case, it would have been nice to explain what you |
17 |
were doing rather than just cut & paste and expect people to just know |
18 |
what happened. |
19 |
|
20 |
I'm quite happy to learn the processes, but an explanation would have |
21 |
been useful as well. |
22 |
|
23 |
> > > Sorry that it took so long for a dev to respond to your request but |
24 |
> > > this is precisely one of the reasons that I would prefer bug reports |
25 |
> > > on bugzilla rather than the ML. I forget to 'fix things' that are |
26 |
> > > presented on the ML and then they get buried and I won't be able to |
27 |
> > > easily tell what needs to happen. |
28 |
> > |
29 |
> > bugs can also get easily forgotten, and need pinging from time to time |
30 |
> > to get things moving. |
31 |
> |
32 |
> Sorry, this is mainly the case for non-trivial bugs, and overflow |
33 |
> situations on the active devs for this project. |
34 |
|
35 |
That's o.k. |
36 |
|
37 |
Alan. |
38 |
|
39 |
-- |
40 |
gentoo-alt@l.g.o mailing list |