1 |
On Tuesday 25 May 2010 16:08:55 Harald van Dijk wrote: |
2 |
> On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 03:33:33PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: |
3 |
> > On Tuesday 25 May 2010 14:46:01 Matti Bickel wrote: |
4 |
> > > I wrangle bugs when there's a need and I'd |
5 |
> > > like to hear what maintainers want to see on a bug assigned to them. |
6 |
> > > If info is missing I usually ask for it and assign the bug anyway. If |
7 |
> > > that's not wanted, let me know. |
8 |
> > |
9 |
> > i dont feel like this should go to the maintainer yet. if a report is |
10 |
> > missing something that the maintainer needs, it isnt ready for them to |
11 |
> > look at. so wranglers ask for it, leave it assigned to bug-wranglers, |
12 |
> > and close as NEEDINFO. when (if) things become available, it can then |
13 |
> > be re-opened and moved to the maintainer. |
14 |
> |
15 |
> No, don't close as NEEDINFO, mark as ASSIGNED. NEEDINFO bugs cannot be |
16 |
> reopened by other users, even if they provide the requested information. |
17 |
> NEEDINFO bugs are also easily forgotten about when the reporter forgets |
18 |
> to reopen the bug him/herself. |
19 |
|
20 |
and people on the wrangler alias see that traffic, so the state doesnt matter. |
21 |
but i guess you're trying to cater to people who only scan the assigned list |
22 |
rather than watching the e-mails sent to it. |
23 |
|
24 |
> Plus, it's in the docs anyway. |
25 |
|
26 |
then i guess i'll point this out to those who wrangle these things to |
27 |
maintainers w/out following the docs. thanks. |
28 |
-mike |