Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Marking bugs for bugday?

[Ioannis Aslanidis]

Well, I personally would prefer to have two keywords at least, one for
candidates and another for confirmed bugs. Otherwise it will be a real
trouble for us to sort things out. If adding more than one keywords
breaks anything, then I can tell you now it is already broken.

The only thing that could make me thing that one keyword is enough, is
that an actual comment is added every time a keyword is being added or
removed off a bug, to be able to keep track of these changes.

On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 3:45 PM, Robert Buchholz <rbu@g.o> wrote:
> On Tuesday 02 March 2010, Sebastian Pipping wrote:
>> On 03/02/10 20:28, Nathan Zachary wrote:
>> >> This looks like overkill to me. One keyword should be enough, and
>> >> for supplementary information "Status Whiteboard" could be used.
>> >
>> > I agree.  Simply having the BUGDAY keyword should be sufficient,
>> > and more information can be provided elsewhere in the report.
>>
>> If more than one keyword is commonly considered overkill I would at
>> least request the whiteboard for it: "somewhere in the report"
>>  involves more than zero searching for it.
>
> Some people use the whiteboard for their own marking of bugs (e.g.
> security, and myself). If you add more information in there, you might
> be breaking other people's marking / sorting algorithms.
>
> I'd say one keyword BUGDAY is enough. Any bug editor can set and remove
> it and the bug history will show who set and removed it when. Sorting
> any syntax is taken care of by Bugzilla that way. It seems to me problem
> you seem to try to solve (review of bugs) can also be tackled with tools
> displaying new bugs that have the keyword set and just removing the
> keyword. If bugs are repeatedly spammed with BUGDAY comments, talk to
> the spammers or leave a comment.
>
>
>
> Robert
>



-- 
Ioannis Aslanidis
http://www.deathwing00.org
<deathwing00[at]gentoo.org> 0x47F370A0