| 1 |
Stephen Bennett wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Wed, 14 Jun 2006 20:01:04 +0200 |
| 3 |
> Jakub Moc <jakub@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
>> This new terminology plain sucks. If you are sticking games into |
| 6 |
>> <herd> in metadata.xml, you are just confusing me and other people |
| 7 |
>> who are assigning bugs. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> It's not new. If it confuses you, perhaps you should learn the |
| 10 |
> terminology used in metadata before you try to assign bugs based upon |
| 11 |
> it. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Sure... so, perhaps you have some suggestion how I can read assign bugs |
| 14 |
otherwise than using the metadata.xml; perhaps I could learn to read |
| 15 |
minds of the developers who dump irrelevant stuff into metadata.xml and |
| 16 |
expect someone to know what they meant. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Meanwhile, I can just tell you that quite a bunch of people will |
| 19 |
actually get pretty angry once you start to apply this new on not-so-new |
| 20 |
terminology on stuff placed under their herd/project/whatever and will |
| 21 |
be dumping stuff on them... Like, perl, apache or php for starters. |
| 22 |
Because, they will get the bugs assigned, and they won't like it. And, |
| 23 |
we yet lack another method of assigning bugs other than using |
| 24 |
metadata.xml for this. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
Best regards, |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Jakub Moc |
| 31 |
mailto:jakub@g.o |
| 32 |
GPG signature: |
| 33 |
http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xCEBA3D9E |
| 34 |
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
... still no signature ;) |
Archives