| 1 |
On 06/17/2016 03:48 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 9:02 AM, Kristian Fiskerstrand <k_f@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On 06/17/2016 02:18 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 4 |
>> |
| 5 |
>>> If I'm a maintainer and I resolve a bug, how do I know if I should |
| 6 |
>>> mark it resolved or not before it is stable? |
| 7 |
>> |
| 8 |
>> If package is in stable to begin with, I would certainly prefer it not |
| 9 |
>> to be marked fixed before it is in stable in all cases to avoid that |
| 10 |
>> ambiguity. keywords are useful for search and filtering |
| 11 |
>> |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> That would of course work. The question is whether we're willing to |
| 14 |
> live with that. It would mean that most bugs would stay open a lot |
| 15 |
> longer than they do today. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
They would stay open, but can be filtered out by developers in the saved |
| 18 |
searches based on keywords so doesn't show up in the worklist/assigned |
| 19 |
search etc |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> Also, in the case of STABLEREQs would we treat them more like security |
| 23 |
> bugs - the last arch would just post a comment that all archs are |
| 24 |
> stable and un-CC themselves, but leave the bug open to remind the |
| 25 |
> maintainer to go check all open bugs to see if any should be marked |
| 26 |
> fixed? |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Sounds sensible |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
-- |
| 34 |
Kristian Fiskerstrand |
| 35 |
OpenPGP certificate reachable at hkp://pool.sks-keyservers.net |
| 36 |
fpr:94CB AFDD 3034 5109 5618 35AA 0B7F 8B60 E3ED FAE3 |
Archives