| 1 |
On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 12:02 PM, Jeroen Roovers <jer@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> A lot clearer than a single text field littered with keywords would be some |
| 3 |
> tick boxes, indeed. In fact, it makes me wonder why we use a half-obscured list |
| 4 |
> in a select field for adding/removing arch teams now. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
Agree - mostly legacy (perhaps due to previous limitations in bugzilla?). |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
Non-arch-specific tested/stable keywords are useless IMHO. Their main |
| 9 |
purpose is for bug filtering. The concept is that you have a large |
| 10 |
team of arch testers who can do the testing, and a smaller team of |
| 11 |
devs with commit access who search for bugs with the appropriate marks |
| 12 |
and do the commit/close (often with little testing of their own). |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
When only amd64 was doing it the single keyword worked fine. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
Do we have enough ATs around that this is even worth having any |
| 17 |
longer? I know that whenever I run my keyworded-but-still-amd64-cc |
| 18 |
query it is pretty rare for stuff to come up. Years ago that was the |
| 19 |
arch team bread-and-butter. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Rich |
Archives