| 1 |
El dom, 15-04-2012 a las 19:10 +0300, Samuli Suominen escribió: |
| 2 |
> On 04/15/2012 06:47 PM, Marcin Mirosław wrote: |
| 3 |
> > W dniu 2012-04-14 13:02, Pacho Ramos pisze: |
| 4 |
> >> Hello |
| 5 |
> >> |
| 6 |
> >> From time to time I see old bug reports that are still wrongly |
| 7 |
> >> opened and referring to old packages no longer in the tree. Would |
| 8 |
> >> be possible to add a way to periodically check for bugs referring |
| 9 |
> >> in summary to obsolete packages and, then, allow us to have a |
| 10 |
> >> cleaner bug list? |
| 11 |
> > |
| 12 |
> > Hi, |
| 13 |
> > what about siutation package was removed from tree. After sometime |
| 14 |
> > other maintainer wants to put this package to the tree again, |
| 15 |
> > shouldn't fix those bugs before doing this? |
| 16 |
> > Marcin |
| 17 |
> > |
| 18 |
> > |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> When package foobar gets removed from Portage, the remaining bugs |
| 21 |
> affecting foobar gets closed with resolution WONTFIX/OBSOLETE/FIXED |
| 22 |
> depending on type of the bug. |
| 23 |
> When package foobar gets readded to Portage, the maintainer needs to |
| 24 |
> check also for closed bugs. |
| 25 |
> That's how it is now, and the workflow wouldn't change with this proposal. |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
> So you are right, but irrelevant to the /topic in hand. |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
> - Samuli |
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
> |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
The problem is that, in reality, some bugs are forgotten and are keep |
| 34 |
opened. Currently, I manually check for them, but it's sometimes hard to |
| 35 |
do this manually. The idea of generating a QA report (like others in |
| 36 |
http://qa-reports.gentoo.org/) would allow me to easily review that list |
| 37 |
periodically to check that obsolete bugs are closed. |
Archives