1 |
On Friday 12 March 2010 23:47:05 William Hubbs wrote: |
2 |
> On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 08:11:50PM +0000, Jeremy Olexa wrote: |
3 |
> > On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 21:18:03 +0200, Petteri R??ty <betelgeuse@g.o> |
4 |
> > |
5 |
> > wrote: |
6 |
> > > There seems to be two different schools on who to assign a keywording |
7 |
> > > bug with only a single arch. I have myself assigned it to the arch in |
8 |
> > > question but there's a difference of opinion here: |
9 |
> > > http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=272160#c5 |
10 |
> > > Let's get agreed on a single approach and I will add a note here: |
11 |
> > > http://devmanual.gentoo.org/keywording/index.html |
12 |
> > > I naturally support the approach I have been doing as I think the arch |
13 |
> > > team is the one in charge. |
14 |
> > |
15 |
> > The "problem" with assigning bugs to arch teams is when the user comments |
16 |
> > on the bug after it is resolved. If the arch team is CC'd, they remove |
17 |
> > themselves when done and any comments after the bug is closed goes to |
18 |
> > someone that is interested. If the arch team is assigned, then the |
19 |
> > comment basically goes to /dev/null. So, if we are to improve the user |
20 |
> > experience, assign to maintainer and CC arch team. |
21 |
> |
22 |
> This is a good enough reason for me to vote for assigning bugs to |
23 |
> maintainers and cc'ing arch teams. This is the way I was taught that |
24 |
> this should be handled, and this comment explains why. |
25 |
> |
26 |
> Since all the arch team does is stabilize or keyword, the maintainer |
27 |
> needs to know if other issues come up with the bug after it is closed. |
28 |
> |
29 |
> William |
30 |
I like that idea as well |
31 |
-- |
32 |
Markos Chandras (hwoarang) |
33 |
Gentoo Linux Developer |
34 |
Web: http://hwoarang.silverarrow.org |