| 1 |
В Вск, 04/01/2009 в 18:57 +0100, Robert Buchholz пишет: |
| 2 |
> On Sunday 04 January 2009, Mike Auty wrote: |
| 3 |
> > Jeroen Roovers wrote: |
| 4 |
> > > The order ("first maintainer as assignee" or "first maintainer/herd |
| 5 |
> > > as assignee") is open to discussion and I think this is the proper |
| 6 |
> > > forum to have that discussion. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> I actually implemented it this way before (only that I had all herds |
| 9 |
> with higher priority than all maintainers, which is the reverse of your |
| 10 |
> patch). |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> Accepting the fact that different teams have different preferences, we |
| 13 |
> need to find a solution for them to set theirs individually. This could |
| 14 |
> either be the order of elements in metadata.xml (and would set the |
| 15 |
> preference on a per-package basis) or some attribute in herds.xml |
| 16 |
> (which would be a global setting per herd, and we'd need to find a |
| 17 |
> default). |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
It looks like we really need some per-team configuration for default |
| 20 |
assignment. Probably it's good idea to add 'weight' (or 'nice') |
| 21 |
attribute for <herd> and <maintainer> elements both in herds.xml and |
| 22 |
metadata.xml. Bug assignment field will be selected from the elements |
| 23 |
with minimal weight (least nice ;)). IMO best is to assign on first |
| 24 |
(any) maintainer in this list and on first (any) herd if there is no |
| 25 |
maintainer elements there. If weight is defined in multiple places, per |
| 26 |
category weight overrides weight from herd.xml and weight in |
| 27 |
metadata.xml overrides everything. This allows easy way to define any |
| 28 |
policy team wants but still allow maintainer to override team |
| 29 |
preference. What do you think? |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
-- |
| 32 |
Peter. |
Archives