| 1 |
On Thursday 24 April 2008, Jeroen Roovers wrote: |
| 2 |
> One other thing is that it is sometimes difficult to figure out to |
| 3 |
> whom a bug should be assigned, because metadata.xml for many packages |
| 4 |
> simply isn't clear. If you list a few developers as well as a herd, |
| 5 |
> does that mean you want bugs assigned to the herd or to a single |
| 6 |
> developer who happens to be in that list? Some packages list several |
| 7 |
> herds in metadata.xml. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
unfortunately this is dependent on the herd/developers. debating which is |
| 10 |
correct is pointless. let's add a priority or some other marker to the dtd |
| 11 |
so people updating the xml can indicate the preference themselves. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
> Bugs can be assigned to just one address |
| 14 |
> (or you get "Assignee: jer@g.o,bug-wranglers@g.o did not |
| 15 |
> match anything"). |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
that's why the CC list exists |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
> [2] has nothing explicit to say on this subject, sadly. It seems some |
| 20 |
> editors of metadata.xml use the file as a sort of CREDITS or AUTHORS. |
| 21 |
> While that may seem OK, the file is intended to give information about |
| 22 |
> ebuilds. ChangeLog is intended to credit authors (specifically |
| 23 |
> mentioning ebuild authors and contributors[3]). |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
agreed. metadata.xml is certainly not the place for giving credit. use the |
| 26 |
ChangeLog file. |
| 27 |
-mike |
Archives