| 1 |
On 02/27/10 17:22, Mark Loeser wrote: |
| 2 |
> I think the goal was to have http://bugday.gentoo.org/ fill this role |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
whenever i visit bugday.gentoo.org it takes minutes to load. |
| 5 |
afair for the two bugdays i participated it didn't display anything |
| 6 |
helpful (to me), especially: why does it show fixed bugs, too? about |
| 7 |
half of them are fixed. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
section "new, requests for ebuilds, or just a version bump" doesn't have |
| 10 |
a single bug after 2006, that's how "new" it is. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
> instead of polluting bugzie with more keywords. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
would a single keyword be pollution? |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
> I'm not really attached |
| 19 |
> to one approach over the other, but atleast this little site gives the |
| 20 |
> users one place to have to check for things and we can categorize them |
| 21 |
> easily. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
what i see as an advantage of the bugzilla-keyword approach is that any |
| 24 |
developer can contribute: everyone (especially bug wranglers) can mark |
| 25 |
bugs for bugday easily from bugzilla. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
bugday.gentoo.org could still be used as an entry point showing these bugs. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
sebastian |
Archives