| 1 |
On Tuesday 25 May 2010 22:58:43 Jeroen Roovers wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Tue, 25 May 2010 14:24:05 -0400 Mike Frysinger wrote: |
| 3 |
> > On Tuesday 18 May 2010 02:02:01 Andreas K. Huettel wrote: |
| 4 |
> > > could you please help the poor bug wranglers a bit?! The queue has |
| 5 |
> > > reached 170 unassigned bugs... |
| 6 |
> > |
| 7 |
> > people dont seem to realize that bug-wranglers isnt just for |
| 8 |
> > re-assigning to the proper maintainer. they are supposed to be doing |
| 9 |
> > basic triage, user feedback, as well as cleaning up the bug. i |
| 10 |
> > shouldnt be seeing bugs assigned to maintainers that have |
| 11 |
> > "${PN}-1.ebuild" as their subject, nor bugs that lack basic things |
| 12 |
> > like `emerge --info` or build logs. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> Without looking at the rest of this whole thread, that's lucky lucky |
| 15 |
> wishful thinking. It doesn't match reality. Hope you're OK with that. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
reality matches what i said. bug wranglers *are supposed to be*. if reality |
| 18 |
matched what i wanted, then i wouldnt have written an e-mail of "supposed to |
| 19 |
be" and "shouldnt be" statements. |
| 20 |
-mike |
Archives