1 |
Ned Ludd wrote: |
2 |
> On Tue, 2007-04-17 at 14:56 -0400, Doug Goldstein wrote: |
3 |
> |
4 |
>> I would like to take this time to note and re-affirm the proper bug |
5 |
>> assignment policy and have it noted somewhere officially in Gentoo Policy. |
6 |
>> |
7 |
>> Bugs that are created for the purpose of getting arches to keyword or |
8 |
>> stabilize a particular package should initially be assigned to the |
9 |
>> herd/maintainer of said package with all requested arches being CCed. |
10 |
>> Once all but the last arch has keyworded said package, it is acceptable |
11 |
>> and proper for a bug wrangler and/or maintainer/herd to re-assign the |
12 |
>> bug to the last remaining arch and they remove that arch from CC. They |
13 |
>> should add their herd/maintainer to the CC of the bug. |
14 |
>> |
15 |
>> Once the last remaining arch has completed the bug, it is up to them to |
16 |
>> close it. They know it's up to them to close it since the bug is |
17 |
>> assigned directly to them. |
18 |
>> |
19 |
>> This helps keep bugzilla tidy and makes it easy to identify |
20 |
>> stabilization/keywording requests which are a priority for that arch to |
21 |
>> take care of. |
22 |
>> |
23 |
> |
24 |
> |
25 |
> This is in direct conflict with the security bug policy handling which |
26 |
> end up putting the maintainer on the CC: along with the arches. |
27 |
> |
28 |
> Also please don't cross post. |
29 |
> |
30 |
> -solar |
31 |
> |
32 |
> |
33 |
> |
34 |
Then can we officially say this is at the discretion of the maintainer |
35 |
of said package then? |
36 |
|
37 |
I'd just like this to be official noted as who can make this decision |
38 |
and who can not and what is the recommended handling. To avoid conflicts |
39 |
in the future. |
40 |
-- |
41 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |