Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Ryan Hill <dirtyepic@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: robo-stable bugs
Date: Wed, 22 May 2013 00:47:22
Message-Id: 20130521185720.2d63368a@caribou.gateway.2wire.net
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] robo-stable bugs by Jeroen Roovers
1 On Sun, 19 May 2013 15:40:27 +0200
2 Jeroen Roovers <jer@g.o> wrote:
3
4 > > OS: Linux
5 > > Status: CONFIRMED
6 > > Severity: enhancement
7 >
8 > Is a stabilisation an enhancement per se? If all stabilisations are
9 > enhancements, then why isn't Severity set to Normal instead? (What is
10 > an enhanced severity to begin with, Mozilla?)
11
12 Huh? The severity of the bug is it's an enhancement.
13
14 Yes stabilizations are enhancements. Always have been.
15
16 > Also, your script does not set the STABLEREQ keyword. People are having
17 > to hunt down your robo-stabilisation requests and add it themselves.
18 > You should just do it yourself or turn your script off.
19
20 Did you read the message? The point is you're supposed to add that yourself.
21 It's not a STABLEREQ until you add arches.
22
23
24 --
25 Ryan Hill psn: dirtyepic_sk
26 gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org
27
28 47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E 7F92 ED38 BD49 957A 8463

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: robo-stable bugs Tom Wijsman <TomWij@g.o>
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: robo-stable bugs Jeroen Roovers <jer@g.o>