Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: R Hill <dirtyepic.sk@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: Hold on portage feature requests
Date: Sun, 31 Jul 2005 17:10:03
Message-Id: dcj0g2$cqg$1@sea.gmane.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Hold on portage feature requests by Alec Joseph Warner
1 Alec Joseph Warner wrote:
2 > Donnie Berkholz wrote:
3 >>
4 >> Are you having a tough time filtering out enhancements in your queries
5 >> or something? I don't understand how feature requests could possibly
6 >> interfere with anything besides other enhancements.
7 >>
8 >
9 > Many of the enhancements aren't marked as such,
10
11 Then they should be. ;) There's nothing wrong with reclassifying your
12 bugs to make it easier to manage them. The features are there exactly
13 for this reason - so critical bugs don't get drowned out by less
14 important bugs or enhancement requests. I guess it doesn't really
15 matter, but it would have been just as easy to set the severity of these
16 bugs to min or enh rather than close them, and then they would still
17 show up on a simple search.
18
19 The planned portage changes sound great. I'll be looking forward to
20 seeing them in action. :)
21
22 --de.
23
24 --
25 gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Hold on portage feature requests Jason Stubbs <jstubbs@g.o>