| 1 |
Hi developers and other users, |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
since jakub[1] went completely missing a few weeks ago a few others and |
| 5 |
I have been wrangling the bugs. I've heard rumours that this isn't |
| 6 |
working smoothly yet. Of course most of that can be fully blamed on |
| 7 |
bugzilla itself, but there are some things that need to be pointed out |
| 8 |
or discussed. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
One thing I'd like to point out is that if you don't agree with a |
| 11 |
specific mangle, just CC whoever did it on the bug and explain. |
| 12 |
If you don't give me the feedback, I can never know how you would |
| 13 |
rather have wanted to get bugs delivered. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
One other thing is that it is sometimes difficult to figure out to |
| 16 |
whom a bug should be assigned, because metadata.xml for many packages |
| 17 |
simply isn't clear. If you list a few developers as well as a herd, |
| 18 |
does that mean you want bugs assigned to the herd or to a single |
| 19 |
developer who happens to be in that list? Some packages list several |
| 20 |
herds in metadata.xml. Bugs can be assigned to just one address |
| 21 |
(or you get "Assignee: jer@g.o,bug-wranglers@g.o did not |
| 22 |
match anything"). |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
[2] has nothing explicit to say on this subject, sadly. It seems some |
| 25 |
editors of metadata.xml use the file as a sort of CREDITS or AUTHORS. |
| 26 |
While that may seem OK, the file is intended to give information about |
| 27 |
ebuilds. ChangeLog is intended to credit authors (specifically |
| 28 |
mentioning ebuild authors and contributors[3]). |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
So maybe this needs to be layed out more specifically in the Developer |
| 31 |
Handbook, or maybe this needs to be discussed more. I can tell that |
| 32 |
from my end, and possibly from the viewpoint of any user who is seeking |
| 33 |
support contacts, listing more than one contact in metadata.xml is |
| 34 |
rather pointless, unless descriptions are added so that it's clear |
| 35 |
which component of a package is supported by whom. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
All in all I guess we need to make the rules up as we go and decide |
| 38 |
policy later. I suggest the first herd/address in the list should be |
| 39 |
the primary contact. If you don't agree with that, please consult |
| 40 |
metadata.xml for the package or reassign to bug-wranglers with an |
| 41 |
explanation (and perhaps a promise to quickly change metadata.xml. :) |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
Kind regards, |
| 45 |
JeR |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
[1] Where is the old bugger? Anyone know? On a strictly human level, I |
| 49 |
am getting quite worried. |
| 50 |
[2] |
| 51 |
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/handbook/handbook.xml?part=2&chap=4 |
| 52 |
[3] |
| 53 |
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/handbook/handbook.xml?part=3&chap=1#doc_chap3_sect6 |
| 54 |
-- |
| 55 |
gentoo-dev@l.g.o mailing list |
Archives