1 |
Vincent Schut wrote: |
2 |
> On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 18:30:55 +0200, Joshua Nichols <nichoj@g.o> |
3 |
> wrote: |
4 |
> |
5 |
>> Vincent Schut wrote: |
6 |
>>> On Wed, 29 Mar 2006 01:02:48 +0200, Joshua Nichols |
7 |
>>> <nichoj-aBrp7R+bbdUdnm+yROfE0A@××××××××××××.org> wrote: |
8 |
>>> |
9 |
>>>> Wiktor Wandachowicz wrote: |
10 |
>>>>> Miroslav Šulc <miroslav.sulc@...> writes: |
11 |
>>>>> |
12 |
>>>>> |
13 |
>>>>>> Hi, |
14 |
>>>>>> |
15 |
>>>>>> where should we submit bugs related to migration overlay? Should |
16 |
>>>>>> we use |
17 |
>>>>>> bugs.gentoo.org? |
18 |
>>>>>> |
19 |
>>>>>> |
20 |
>>>>> |
21 |
>>>>> I'm afraid that the b.g.o maintainers wouldn't like it much... |
22 |
>>>>> Maybe there should be some thread / page in the javaexperimental |
23 |
>>>>> trac? |
24 |
>>>>> (and I don't think that posting it here is best, I was corrected |
25 |
>>>>> once) |
26 |
>>>>> |
27 |
>>>>> But on the other hand, some METABUG in b.g.o shouldn't be a problem, |
28 |
>>>>> like the jdk-1.5 METABUG maybe? And the maintainers should know |
29 |
>>>>> about it |
30 |
>>>>> beforehand, so they wouldn't dismiss such reports as INVALID or |
31 |
>>>>> WONTFIX. |
32 |
>>>>> |
33 |
>>>>> |
34 |
>>>>> |
35 |
>>>> I actually don't think using bugs.gentoo.org would be too bad. |
36 |
>>>> Although, it would be preferred if bugs directly to |
37 |
>>>> java-aBrp7R+bbdUdnm+yROfE0A@××××××××××××.org, so we don't drive |
38 |
>>>> bug-wranglers crazy. To this end, I made a 'bookmarkable template' |
39 |
>>>> and setup a tinyurl for it: |
40 |
>>>> |
41 |
>>>> *http://tinyurl.com/ofzha* |
42 |
>>>> |
43 |
>>>> Please use this for reporting migration-related bugs. It should be |
44 |
>>>> preset to be assigned to |
45 |
>>>> java-aBrp7R+bbdUdnm+yROfE0A@××××××××××××.org, block the migration |
46 |
>>>> bug, and will have [migration-overlay] in the title. |
47 |
>>> |
48 |
>>> I tried using the tinyurl link to file a bug about tomcat (bug nr. |
49 |
>>> 127949), but I think it still went to the normal bug-wranglers. See |
50 |
>>> the following reply |
51 |
>>> I got: |
52 |
>>> |
53 |
>>> Display all headersSubject: [Bug 127949] [migration-overlay] |
54 |
>>> tomcat-5.5.16 works for amd64 |
55 |
>>> To: schut@×××××××××.nl |
56 |
>>> From: bugzilla-daemon@g.o |
57 |
>>> Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 09:05:09 +0000 |
58 |
>>> |
59 |
>>> --------- start forward --------- |
60 |
>>> Clear-Text: http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=127949 |
61 |
>>> Secure: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=127949 |
62 |
>>> |
63 |
>>> |
64 |
>>> jakub@g.o changed: |
65 |
>>> |
66 |
>>> What |Removed |Added |
67 |
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
68 |
>>> CC| |java@g.o |
69 |
>>> Status|NEW |RESOLVED |
70 |
>>> Resolution| |UPSTREAM |
71 |
>>> |
72 |
>>> |
73 |
>>> |
74 |
>>> |
75 |
>>> ------- Comment #1 from jakub@g.o 2006-03-29 01:05 PST ------- |
76 |
>>> Hmmmm, better ask the people who run the overlay... |
77 |
>>> |
78 |
>>> |
79 |
>>> --Configure bugmail: http://bugs.gentoo.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email |
80 |
>>> ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- |
81 |
>>> You reported the bug, or are watching the reporter. |
82 |
>>> --------- end forward --------- |
83 |
>> |
84 |
>> Well, first, the bug you filed really doesn't have anything to do |
85 |
>> with the migration overlay (because it's from the experimental |
86 |
>> overlay). That being said, I was working on keywording it around the |
87 |
>> time you filed it, and should be fixed. |
88 |
> |
89 |
> Ah, sorry. I assumed they belonged together. |
90 |
> Could someone please tell me then how/where to file bugs regarding the |
91 |
> experimental overlay? |
92 |
|
93 |
I suppose we could use the same strategy as migration-overlay, ie put |
94 |
[java-experimental] in the summary, and assign the bug directly to |
95 |
java@g.o. |
96 |
|
97 |
|
98 |
> |
99 |
> Vincent. |
100 |
>> |
101 |
>> As for why it got assigned to bug-wranglers... I think there's an |
102 |
>> issue with bugzilla where you can't switch between simple and expert |
103 |
>> modes for filing bug. I suspect that this happened with the upgrade a |
104 |
>> bit back, and you're stuck with whatever mode you were using at that |
105 |
>> time. The feature for assigning directly to someone (ie |
106 |
>> java@g.o) is one of the features from expert, so this would |
107 |
>> explain why it didn't take effect. |
108 |
>> |
109 |
>> So, I'll try to have a word with the bug wranglers to make sure these |
110 |
>> don't get resolved this way. |
111 |
>> |
112 |
>> - Josh |
113 |
-- |
114 |
gentoo-java@g.o mailing list |