Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: On dropping sparc@ from CC on bugs

[Matt Turner]

On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 3:07 PM, Aaron Bauman <bman@g.o> wrote:
> On Monday, September 11, 2017 3:43:13 AM EDT Sergei Trofimovich wrote:
>> On Sun, 10 Sep 2017 22:18:08 +0000
>>
>> bugzilla-daemon@g.o wrote:
>> > DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL. Also, do not reply via email to the person
>> > whose email is mentioned below. To comment on this bug, please visit:
>> >
>> > https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=621130
>> >
>> > Aaron Bauman <bman@g.o> changed:
>> >            What    |Removed                     |Added
>> >
>> > --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > -->
>> >                  CC|sparc@g.o            |
>> >
>> > --- Comment #16 from Aaron Bauman <bman@g.o> ---
>> > sparc was dropped to exp.
>> >
>> > https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/commit/?id=b5901d8f716555a1479f1
>> > 2313a2925fcadd177a9
>> [ CCed gentoo-dev@ to raise general awareness ]
>>
>> Why do you need to drop sparc@ from CC on all the bugs?
>>
>> It takes away possibility from users using sparc@ to report
>> test status easily. Even after the bug is closed.
>>
>> sh@ and s390@ are also exp profiles and CC is one of mechanisms
>> to ask arch teams to try keywording/stablereq.
>
> You're right.  Fixed.

Aaron's agreement was not an agreement at all. He ignored the request
and instead removed the other exp arches from Cc.

Before I realized this, I assumed that he was agreeing, so I readded
sparc@ to the places he'd removed it. This evidently irritated him and
he told me so on IRC.

I suggested that when security bugs are complete, that if there are
exp architectures still Cc'd, that security simply reassign to the
maintainer and let the bug continue as a regular stabilization bug.

Unfortunately Aaron says that this is far too much work -- the hassle
of reassigning a bug and all.