-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Scott Kitterman wrote:
> Who is going to add upstream projects for the thousands of packages in > Ubuntu? > I don't imagine this approach is very scalable. > > If some teams are using the status this way, I don't think the right answer > is > to say, "No, you should do it this way that's more work." > > Scott K > I'm in complete agreement here - At the end of the day, i just want to be able to file bugs, and deal with bugs. I don't want to sacrifice a goat each time i want to do something vaguely complicated in launchpad (like add an upstream task to a bug), and i don't want to have to triple my workload (for eg), just because the LP guys have changed the way they want to use bug statuses. Or because they've removed portals that people were actively using. Or because they've closed bugs marked as incomplete, but that someone hasn't gotten around to yet. At the end of the day, it's a bug tracker. It's not building an elaborate rocket. The extra features are supposed to make launchpad easier to use, not harder and more confusing. Sometimes I think that people lose sight of this. Hobbsee -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHA6sd7/o1b30rzoURAovlAKCQx+xDwDGYxgxhJq7GCsB8Gb5TWQCgwM3U wKknfjop0UF6kz5+hK7H3GY= =uca2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- launchpad-users mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/launchpad-users
