| 1 |
On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 15:06:34 -0600 R Hill <dirtyepic.sk@×××××.com> |
| 2 |
wrote: |
| 3 |
| Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 4 |
| > I've been going through the EBUILD list at random and providing |
| 5 |
| > lists of things that need to be fixed before the ebuild can be |
| 6 |
| > considered for inclusion. The WONTFIX resolution along with a |
| 7 |
| > comment asking for the submitter to reopen with a fixed ebuild is |
| 8 |
| > used when problems are found. |
| 9 |
| |
| 10 |
| Is it possible to leave these bugs in an open state? |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
I'd rather not... There're 600+ items on the list, it's too hard to |
| 13 |
maintain. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
| WONTFIX doesn't seem the right tool for the job: |
| 16 |
| |
| 17 |
| WONTFIX |
| 18 |
| The problem described is a bug which will never be fixed. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
And the ebuild attached will never be 'fixed' in the state it is in. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
| Often i believe the ebuild submitter is a different party than the |
| 23 |
| one who originally opened the bug. Also, an individual who fixes up |
| 24 |
| an ebuild to comply with the review could again be a completely |
| 25 |
| different person. Neither of these people can reopen the bug. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Yeah, the lack of reopening powers is a problem. I'd rather this was |
| 28 |
solved by a) letting any authenticated user reopen any bug and, if |
| 29 |
necessary, b) allowing developers to lock bugs. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
| Can I suggest REVIEW+ and REVIEW- keywords? :) When an updated |
| 32 |
| ebuild is submitted, the submitter could simply remove the REVIEW- |
| 33 |
| keyword to get the bug back in the to-be-reviewed queue. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
Changing keywords correctly seems to be rather a lot to ask from people |
| 36 |
who can't even manage to mark ebuilds as text/plain... |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
-- |
| 39 |
Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Shell tools, Fluxbox, Cron) |
| 40 |
Mail : ciaranm at gentoo.org |
| 41 |
Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm |
Archives