| 1 |
> > Wouldn't it be much easier if there was a single alias (say) arches@g.o |
| 2 |
> > that these types of bug could be assigned to? |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> good idea, but i think arches@g.o should be an alias to the |
| 5 |
> responsible arch maintainers rather than the groups themselves (too |
| 6 |
> crowded sometimes) |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
I believe that's what he meant... but I'm against using arches@g.o for |
| 9 |
that sort of thing because it will generate useless spam for arches that |
| 10 |
don't need to be notified... plus most arch maintainers won't notice |
| 11 |
those bugs because they're not assigned to their arch... they don't want |
| 12 |
to dig through all the arches@ bug reports to find ones that pertain to |
| 13 |
them still... |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
Plus, if you assign it to the arches, they can remove themselves from |
| 16 |
the bug once they have taken care of it for their arch and not be |
| 17 |
bothered by it any more... |
Archives