1 |
On Tue, 25 May 2010 22:08:55 +0200 |
2 |
Harald van Dijk <truedfx@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 03:33:33PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: |
5 |
> > On Tuesday 25 May 2010 14:46:01 Matti Bickel wrote: |
6 |
> > > I wrangle bugs when there's a need and I'd |
7 |
> > > like to hear what maintainers want to see on a bug assigned to |
8 |
> > > them. If info is missing I usually ask for it and assign the bug |
9 |
> > > anyway. If that's not wanted, let me know. |
10 |
> > |
11 |
> > i dont feel like this should go to the maintainer yet. if a report |
12 |
> > is missing something that the maintainer needs, it isnt ready for |
13 |
> > them to look at. so wranglers ask for it, leave it assigned to |
14 |
> > bug-wranglers, and close as NEEDINFO. when (if) things become |
15 |
> > available, it can then be re-opened and moved to the maintainer. |
16 |
> |
17 |
> No, don't close as NEEDINFO, mark as ASSIGNED. NEEDINFO bugs cannot be |
18 |
> reopened by other users, even if they provide the requested |
19 |
> information. NEEDINFO bugs are also easily forgotten about when the |
20 |
> reporter forgets to reopen the bug him/herself. Plus, it's in the |
21 |
> docs anyway. |
22 |
|
23 |
If you have to CLOSE a bug because it's blatantly lacking the proper |
24 |
info, language, spelling etc, then CC yourself. It's the least you can |
25 |
do to make sure there's some kind of follow-up. |
26 |
|
27 |
|
28 |
Regards, |
29 |
jer |