-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
On 08/06/2013 11:46 PM, Jeroen Roovers wrote:
> 23:37:25 <willikins> rej, you have notes! [21:13] <mrueg> Let me
> rephrase this: Just a friendly notice to please refrain from
> rephrasing bug summaries from "Stabilize ${P}" to "${P} stable
> req". This just adds unneeded noise to the bug. I don't want this
> on bugs I've reported or am assigned to.
>
>
> This is my equally short and "friendly" note: It's not going to
> happen. Forget about it. They are not "your" bug reports and anyone
> is actually /welcome/ to improve them. Get used to it.
>
> To get technical on the "improvement" bit, we have agreed time on
> time that stating the atom and then the action is the way to go.
> The main reasons is that it helps people who need to regularly read
> /lists/ of bug summaries sort them better. Until we get a specific
> [Atoms] field implemented, it will need to stay this way.
>
> Besides the finer technical points of bug maintenance, it simply
> infuriates me that anyone would think of bug reports in the
> possessive. This is not the way to improve the distro. You're on
> the wrong track there. And you weren't being friendly.
>
>
> No kind regards to the sender, jer
>
Hello Jeroen,
first of all I welcome and appreciate the work all members of the
other bug wranglers project[1] and you do.
But please let's tell the whole story from the beginning, so we get a
better picture.
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=442442
Arches were added before.
Jeroen Roovers 2013-08-06 12:46:43 UTC
Summary: Stabilize net-print/foomatic-db-4.0.20120831,
net-print/foomatic-db-ppds-20120831,
net-print/foomatic-db-engine-4.0.8 →
net-print/foomatic-db-4.0.20120831 net-print/foomatic-db-ppds-20120831
net-print/foomatic-db-engine-4.0.8 stable request
Jeroen Roovers 2013-08-06 12:48:22 UTC
Summary: net-print/foomatic-db-4.0.20120831
net-print/foomatic-db-ppds-20120831 net-print/foomatic-db-engine-4.0.8
stable request → net-print/foomatic-db-4.0.20120831
net-print/foomatic-db-ppds-4.0.20120831
net-print/foomatic-db-engine-4.0.8 stable request
<mrueg> rej: for the future: please don't change the summary field in
my bugs. thank you.
<rej> mrueg: I have no idea what you are talking about.
<rej> mrueg: I have no idea what you mean by "[your] bugs" so I'll
keep ignoring that.
I wasn't able to respond, because you were offline and I sent you the
note, that you've already quoted, via willikins. That my second note
was a bit harsh, emerged from the fact, that you seemed to be
unwillingly to discuss this ("ignoring").
But before we get to the core, let's check some preliminaries:
a) The bug wranglers project states their goal (I stressed the
important things) as following:
"The goal of the Bug Wranglers project is to clarify how _new_ bugs on
Gentoo's bug tracker should be handled. This document describes the
rules to bug _assignment_, CC'ing herd teams, maintainers, the role of
metadata.xml and herds.xml, who are bug wranglers and how one should
contact them." [1]
b) "Possessing bugs":
I'm aware of the fact that bugs aren't possesed by me (although
there's a bug search link called "My Bugs"), but I don't want to
neglect the fact, that I have certain responsibilites when bugs are
assigned to me or I've reported them. Both require the effort to
provide information to get the bug fixed. Under no circumstances this
effort should be disturbed.
c) "Improvements"
I like the fact that you and all other who have the possibility to
change bug summaries, use their power to add _more_ information to the
bug summary. But I feel the strong need to stress the word "more".
Anything else is just noise and should be avoided.
d) "Agreements"
I think it is a good idea to create a certain format for bug
summaries, when they include default tasks like keywording or
stabilization.
To make the long story short:
I conclude from a), that the responsiblities of the bug wranglers
project end, when the assignee field is set to another one than
bug-wranglers@g.o. If this is wrong or outdated, please change the
goals of the bug-wranglers or create a new project for these goals.
I conclude from a) and b), although you are the lead of the bug
wranglers project, you have _no_ responsibilities regards this bug as
there exists no relationship between you and this bug (Except for your
membership in hppa (which was added to CC), but I'd say it is not main
task of an arch team to adjust bug summaries and I hope you're
d'accord with this one.).
I conclude from d), that there exists some kind of documentation
(gentoo-dev does not count as a documentation) you could have pointed
me at (instead of telling me you ignore my comment), as you might have
noticed that I joined the project recently.
If this doc does not exist, I'd like you to respect my way to work at
b.g.o and the wish, that I don't want to see any future noise (as
described in c) ) on bugs that I'm related to (as assignee or reporter).
Thank you very much for your understanding.
With kind regards to everyone
Manuel
[1] https://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/qa/bug-wranglers/index.xml
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.20 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/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=znjZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
