| 1 |
Am Freitag, 21. Juni 2013, 14:50:29 schrieb Markos Chandras: |
| 2 |
> On 21 June 2013 12:44, Tomáš Chvátal <tomas.chvatal@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 3 |
> > 2013/6/21 Pacho Ramos <pacho@g.o> |
| 4 |
> > |
| 5 |
> >> Could "maintainer-wanted" assigned bugs be filtered? Otherwise we see a |
| 6 |
> >> ton of that kind of bugs that, I think, we already know can become |
| 7 |
> >> really old ;) |
| 8 |
> >> |
| 9 |
> >> Thanks! |
| 10 |
> > |
| 11 |
> > You can do such yourself. Just clone the repo [1] and commit the updated |
| 12 |
> > links. |
| 13 |
> > |
| 14 |
> > Also my plan was to list even m-w bugs, because even those suckers get |
| 15 |
> > obsoleted often so we should close them. |
| 16 |
> > |
| 17 |
> > Cheers |
| 18 |
> > |
| 19 |
> > Tom |
| 20 |
> > |
| 21 |
> > [1] |
| 22 |
> > http://git.overlays.gentoo.org/gitweb/?p=proj/qa-scripts.git;a=summary |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> That is true. There is nothing special about there m-w bugs. They are |
| 25 |
> still unresolved bugs, for many years. No need to treat |
| 26 |
> them differently. |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
How can a m-w bug be resolved? Adding the package is unlikely to happen if |
| 30 |
last request came years ago. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
My suggestion would be (this is how I handled it in printing): |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
1) leave message on bug |
| 35 |
"Is anyone still interested in this?" |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
2) if noone replies in 2 months, resolve as obsolete |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
-- |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
Andreas K. Huettel |
| 43 |
Gentoo Linux developer |
| 44 |
dilfridge@g.o |
| 45 |
http://www.akhuettel.de/ |
Archives