Am 15.01.2014 17:20, schrieb Tom Wijsman: > On Wed, 15 Jan 2014 07:29:19 +0100 > Sebastian Luther <sebastianlut...@gmx.de> wrote: > >> Am 15.01.2014 04:11, schrieb Tom Wijsman: >> >> >> I send the first mail with this wording 8 days ago. Enough time to >> comment on it. I'd prefer to discuss it on the list. > > Yes, but not all comments were discussed yet, therefore (dis)agreement > on them is missing; and this last thing rather became a topic of > discussion due to the work clashes that we saw happen twice. > I'd say the clashes occurred because nobody mentioned at all what they are working on. Since people started using IN_PROGRESS to mean "I'm working on it", this shouldn't happen again. > > Yes, I see some commit messages not refer to bugs which is something we > will want to avoid; think this might need to go into the commit policy. > There's nothing wrong with fixing/implementing something that nobody filed a bug about.
>> >> The "way it was" is to not care about them at all. There was no >> agreement on the the other thread if these things should be used or >> not. So I left it vague so everyone could use it, but they are not >> forced to. > > Hmm, could this result in conflicting usage of these? Maybe, but I'd first see if the usage patterns converge to something that makes everyone happy. > >>>> +There are a number of bugs named "[TRACKER] *" that collect bugs >>>> +for specific topics. Confirmed bugs should be marked as blocking >>>> +these tracker bugs if appropriate. >>> >>> For clarity, it should be mentioned that this does not mean to block >>> the tracker for the next version; this could be misinterpreted. >> >> Considering that the tracker gets renamed, I'm not sure what you mean >> here. > > As you are confused yourself by misinterpreting what you have written, > you demonstrate the case for the need of clarity here; this is not > about the next version tracker or it being renamed at all, it's about > all other trackers that are not version trackers. The part of the > policy quoted here doesn't make that clear, it had me puzzling for a > moment too when I first read that; I think you were puzzled too now... > Sorry, I failed to properly read what you quoted. I think once you know that these other trackers exist, it's clear. If you want something added there, that's fine with me too. Sebastian
