Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Steve Long <slong@××××××××××××××××××.uk>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: [v4] Planning for automatic assignment computation of bugs
Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2009 08:04:31
Message-Id: gk1nl7$qhf$1@ger.gmane.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] [v4] Planning for automatic assignment computation of bugs by Peter Volkov
1 Peter Volkov wrote:
2
3 > ? ???, 04/01/2009 ? 18:57 +0100, Robert Buchholz ?????:
4 >> Accepting the fact that different teams have different preferences, we
5 >> need to find a solution for them to set theirs individually. This could
6 >> either be the order of elements in metadata.xml (and would set the
7 >> preference on a per-package basis) or some attribute in herds.xml
8 >> (which would be a global setting per herd, and we'd need to find a
9 >> default).
10 >
11 > It looks like we really need some per-team configuration for default
12 > assignment.
13 I agree, given that it's not going to affect running systems (I hope); in
14 the longer term, it would be nice to be able to configure by pkg, cat or
15 herd.
16
17 > Probably it's good idea to add 'weight' (or 'nice')
18 > attribute for <herd> and <maintainer> elements both in herds.xml and
19 > metadata.xml. Bug assignment field will be selected from the elements
20 > with minimal weight (least nice ;)).
21 Shouldn't the 'nicest' entity take it? ;)
22
23 A simple assignToHerd="yes|no|<unset>" (or 0|1) might be easier to deal with
24 (otherwise you're going to have a maintenance headache with the variant
25 levels?) and would deal with all the use-cases afaict; a team does [eg
26 kde/gnome] or does not want bugs, unless the category/CP/CPV merits a
27 change in that policy. Obviously if none set, use the maintainer list as-is
28 without filtering.
29
30 Sure, it can be done by patching the tree over time, but it seems crude and
31 a further maintenance + bug-wrangling burden for no benefit, when the
32 coders are on-hand and engaged to tweak the new impl.
33
34 OFC, a rush to completion is understandable, given how long this has been in
35 the planning; I'd argue that's a reason to go the final ten metres.