Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Jakub Moc <jakub@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Bugzilla usage for overlays' projects [was: sunrise, a temporary compromise]
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 13:06:21
Message-Id: 449BE60A.10601@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Bugzilla usage for overlays' projects [was: sunrise, a temporary compromise] by Seemant Kulleen
1 Seemant Kulleen wrote:
2 > First of all, I'm not sure why devrel was involved in a technical
3 > decision without actually having all the interested parties there, but
4 > aside from that, when Gentoo developers become a bunch of 5 year olds?
5
6 Not sure either, maybe brix will be able to answer your question better.
7
8
9 > What is this absolute nonsense of "you don't like my toy, you can't have
10 > your toy" going on around here? Jakub, if you will disrupt others
11 > because you can't have your way, then please reconsider exactly what
12 > your role is in this project, and maybe even how you might better serve
13 > some other project.
14
15 Uhm, what I am saying here is that we can either have a *general* policy
16 on acceptable bugzilla usage, or no policy at all. Inventing ad-hoc
17 policies for a single project just because a couple of folks dislike
18 that project does not do any good and does not make any sense either.
19
20 The whole concept of status whiteboard and keywords usage constituting a
21 misuse of Gentoo infrastructure is pretty new to me. That stuff is there
22 to make searching for bugs and their grouping easier, and as such has
23 been used. Then someone comes to #-devrel with the above complaint, and
24 devrel (or some its member) within an hour decides that all such
25 keywords and status whiteboard records need to be nuked from bugzilla?
26
27 What are the grounds for such decision, and why it's OK for one
28 unofficial project to use bugzilla for their bugs, and why it's so
29 horribly wrong for another unofficial project to even pollute those
30 fields, without actually creating new bugs? That's what this thread is
31 about, and that's why I have brought this up. Not to harm java migration
32 and java folks. As I have stated already, I have no problem with their
33 bugs, I've even talked to nichoj some weeks ago to arrange it in the
34 best possible way.
35
36
37 > This childishness from *all* sides is getting really old, really fast.
38 > People need to grow the hell up, and quit with the melodrama.
39 >
40 > Seemant
41
42 There would not be any issue if devrel didn't act the way they did, the
43 matter has not been urgent at all.
44
45
46 --
47 Best regards,
48
49 Jakub Moc
50 mailto:jakub@g.o
51 GPG signature:
52 http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xCEBA3D9E
53 Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E
54
55 ... still no signature ;)

Attachments

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