| 1 |
You *should* have the information to assign the bug in the build log, |
| 2 |
provided it's available, as the metadata.xml maintainer information should |
| 3 |
be printed at the top of it. |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
I think automating assignment for properly defined package names in bug |
| 6 |
summaries is something that has been discussed before but never properly |
| 7 |
implemented. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes |
| 10 |
https://blog.flameeyes.eu/ |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
On 27 February 2015 at 03:07, Andrew Savchenko <bircoph@g.o> wrote: |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
> On Thu, 26 Feb 2015 14:00:04 -0800 (PST) Alex Alexander wrote: |
| 15 |
> > Our bug queue has 89 bugs! |
| 16 |
> > |
| 17 |
> > If you have some spare time, please help assign/sort a few bugs. |
| 18 |
> > |
| 19 |
> > To view the bug queue, click here: http://bit.ly/m8PQS5 |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> BTW, maybe this process can be partially automated? In most cases |
| 22 |
> we have to look for category/package in a bug title and add/cc |
| 23 |
> mails from metadata.xml to this bug. Of course, in some cases bug |
| 24 |
> may have references to several packages or no valid references at |
| 25 |
> all; false assignments are also possible as well as not properly |
| 26 |
> submitted bugs (e.g. missing build logs and so on) . But in general |
| 27 |
> such tool should reduce workload greatly. |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
> Another approach will be to allow users to assign bugs themselves. |
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
> Best regards, |
| 32 |
> Andrew Savchenko |
| 33 |
> |
Archives