[gentoo-dev] Handling of keywording bugs with only one arch
There seems to be two different schools on who to assign a keywording bug with only a single arch. I have myself assigned it to the arch in question but there's a difference of opinion here: http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=272160#c5 Let's get agreed on a single approach and I will add a note here: http://devmanual.gentoo.org/keywording/index.html I naturally support the approach I have been doing as I think the arch team is the one in charge. Regards, Petteri signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Handling of keywording bugs with only one arch
On 3/12/10 8:18 PM, Petteri Räty wrote: > There seems to be two different schools on who to assign a keywording > bug with only a single arch. Why a special case for that? The general rule seems to be that the owner is the maintaining herd (if any), otherwise the maintainer. Then all arch teams and possible co-maintaining herds are CC-ed. Anyway, I don't have a strong opinion about any of these, just prefer a simplicity of the rules. Paweł Hajdan jr signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Handling of keywording bugs with only one arch
On 03/12/2010 09:18 PM, Petteri Räty wrote: > There seems to be two different schools on who to assign a keywording > bug with only a single arch. I have myself assigned it to the arch in > question but there's a difference of opinion here: > http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=272160#c5 > Let's get agreed on a single approach and I will add a note here: > http://devmanual.gentoo.org/keywording/index.html > I naturally support the approach I have been doing as I think the arch > team is the one in charge. > > Regards, > Petteri > said archteam maintains the _keyword_, not the ebuild maintainers, so goes to the arch
Re: [gentoo-dev] Handling of keywording bugs with only one arch
On 03/12/2010 09:39 PM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote: > On 3/12/10 8:18 PM, Petteri Räty wrote: >> There seems to be two different schools on who to assign a keywording >> bug with only a single arch. > > Why a special case for that? The general rule seems to be that the owner > is the maintaining herd (if any), otherwise the maintainer. Then all > arch teams and possible co-maintaining herds are CC-ed. > Perhaps a bad habit but I have been using my way as a gentle reminder on really old bugs to minor arches that you should do something already by switching them from Cc to assignee. Regards, Petteri signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Handling of keywording bugs with only one arch
On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 21:18:03 +0200, Petteri Räty wrote: > There seems to be two different schools on who to assign a keywording > bug with only a single arch. I have myself assigned it to the arch in > question but there's a difference of opinion here: > http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=272160#c5 > Let's get agreed on a single approach and I will add a note here: > http://devmanual.gentoo.org/keywording/index.html > I naturally support the approach I have been doing as I think the arch > team is the one in charge. The "problem" with assigning bugs to arch teams is when the user comments on the bug after it is resolved. If the arch team is CC'd, they remove themselves when done and any comments after the bug is closed goes to someone that is interested. If the arch team is assigned, then the comment basically goes to /dev/null. So, if we are to improve the user experience, assign to maintainer and CC arch team. -Jeremy
Re: [gentoo-dev] Handling of keywording bugs with only one arch
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 08:11:50PM +, Jeremy Olexa wrote: > > On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 21:18:03 +0200, Petteri R??ty > wrote: > > There seems to be two different schools on who to assign a keywording > > bug with only a single arch. I have myself assigned it to the arch in > > question but there's a difference of opinion here: > > http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=272160#c5 > > Let's get agreed on a single approach and I will add a note here: > > http://devmanual.gentoo.org/keywording/index.html > > I naturally support the approach I have been doing as I think the arch > > team is the one in charge. > > The "problem" with assigning bugs to arch teams is when the user comments > on the bug after it is resolved. If the arch team is CC'd, they remove > themselves when done and any comments after the bug is closed goes to > someone that is interested. If the arch team is assigned, then the comment > basically goes to /dev/null. So, if we are to improve the user experience, > assign to maintainer and CC arch team. This is a good enough reason for me to vote for assigning bugs to maintainers and cc'ing arch teams. This is the way I was taught that this should be handled, and this comment explains why. Since all the arch team does is stabilize or keyword, the maintainer needs to know if other issues come up with the bug after it is closed. William pgpCyvqzMRE65.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Handling of keywording bugs with only one arch
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 12-03-2010 20:47, William Hubbs wrote: > On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 08:11:50PM +, Jeremy Olexa wrote: >> >> On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 21:18:03 +0200, Petteri R??ty >> wrote: >>> There seems to be two different schools on who to assign a keywording >>> bug with only a single arch. I have myself assigned it to the arch in >>> question but there's a difference of opinion here: >>> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=272160#c5 >>> Let's get agreed on a single approach and I will add a note here: >>> http://devmanual.gentoo.org/keywording/index.html >>> I naturally support the approach I have been doing as I think the arch >>> team is the one in charge. >> >> The "problem" with assigning bugs to arch teams is when the user comments >> on the bug after it is resolved. If the arch team is CC'd, they remove >> themselves when done and any comments after the bug is closed goes to >> someone that is interested. If the arch team is assigned, then the comment >> basically goes to /dev/null. So, if we are to improve the user experience, >> assign to maintainer and CC arch team. > > This is a good enough reason for me to vote for assigning bugs to > maintainers and cc'ing arch teams. This is the way I was taught that > this should be handled, and this comment explains why. > > Since all the arch team does is stabilize or keyword, the maintainer > needs to know if other issues come up with the bug after it is closed. > > William I agree with the above reasoning, but Petteri raised a good point about "old bugs". I suggest that for old bugs we swap the maintainer and the arch team so that the maintainer is added to CC and the arch team is assigned the bug. If and or when the bug is resolved, the maintainer can reassign the bug again. - -- Regards, Jorge Vicetto (jmbsvicetto) - jmbsvicetto at gentoo dot org Gentoo- forums / Userrel / Devrel / KDE / Elections -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJLmsb4AAoJEC8ZTXQF1qEPqFAQALJvPNGfW1XGUvNptAIxyWl4 5XNRWH4cCgZMgOlESI5DeYRbBySw2ad36CPgm1SLe9AbXtpiDwzNlU4CSZuVZSRZ TsQ82/JjWBgYIkRUu81UmzwqGCC8sFwJfKjOGCwrq+bcC0M30GwtGgtRUW9+B8mO SdJ56QZdAUiUmHKG9zEW/xiE1U3VThp2Y/PwZP/BsRZqNQK/UpN+m2kPw4lYepGN uz9OryVCRXIkIaiPvcX5f94yLCcCtUDQ7JuLuc0tZYQbEKhTPcDtyf0aCfMUIfgr dtSulB6N0L4c03aHqpTCc5BeZwKlbh1VSTEBs7izHQ//Cdj3xJPbnmXWPxa5//vW p9KLdMl5pYIj/h+ENq7l08nmIsZ0ub7gJZPn2XOF6ywyzKJcX5Pg1oU8jQWdUh3L MDUbsZewUz/uubJDG+cawop9hUK0YCazV5DQ8B7niQlR8YNvDBItlsr6yicq4Tkx 9OFPLXZKC/qG0JTGoOyEYcSdFIHN+4R9SFow8twLnUH5BnMHRS0Qc4Pv1TkaW29Y y5Sosf/zt8NWMzBicyXZXnOBSeIhWEobJev2wOgFyFxlp9+HKwzMW4s4iB7ZfKjX MAVRGwMjwwqCKUa2usj3BANuIYj8Lb5TKkt1r+2eWysromOIi8J6Z+BTiI/NKdYu QB9KakEPzPaiL+/uSrVC =OgTi -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [gentoo-dev] Handling of keywording bugs with only one arch
On Friday 12 March 2010 23:47:05 William Hubbs wrote: > On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 08:11:50PM +, Jeremy Olexa wrote: > > On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 21:18:03 +0200, Petteri R??ty > > > > wrote: > > > There seems to be two different schools on who to assign a keywording > > > bug with only a single arch. I have myself assigned it to the arch in > > > question but there's a difference of opinion here: > > > http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=272160#c5 > > > Let's get agreed on a single approach and I will add a note here: > > > http://devmanual.gentoo.org/keywording/index.html > > > I naturally support the approach I have been doing as I think the arch > > > team is the one in charge. > > > > The "problem" with assigning bugs to arch teams is when the user comments > > on the bug after it is resolved. If the arch team is CC'd, they remove > > themselves when done and any comments after the bug is closed goes to > > someone that is interested. If the arch team is assigned, then the > > comment basically goes to /dev/null. So, if we are to improve the user > > experience, assign to maintainer and CC arch team. > > This is a good enough reason for me to vote for assigning bugs to > maintainers and cc'ing arch teams. This is the way I was taught that > this should be handled, and this comment explains why. > > Since all the arch team does is stabilize or keyword, the maintainer > needs to know if other issues come up with the bug after it is closed. > > William I like that idea as well -- Markos Chandras (hwoarang) Gentoo Linux Developer Web: http://hwoarang.silverarrow.org
Re: [gentoo-dev] Handling of keywording bugs with only one arch
On 03/12/2010 10:11 PM, Jeremy Olexa wrote: > > On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 21:18:03 +0200, Petteri Räty > wrote: >> There seems to be two different schools on who to assign a keywording >> bug with only a single arch. I have myself assigned it to the arch in >> question but there's a difference of opinion here: >> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=272160#c5 >> Let's get agreed on a single approach and I will add a note here: >> http://devmanual.gentoo.org/keywording/index.html >> I naturally support the approach I have been doing as I think the arch >> team is the one in charge. > > The "problem" with assigning bugs to arch teams is when the user comments > on the bug after it is resolved. If the arch team is CC'd, they remove > themselves when done and any comments after the bug is closed goes to > someone that is interested. If the arch team is assigned, then the comment > basically goes to /dev/null. So, if we are to improve the user experience, > assign to maintainer and CC arch team. > > -Jeremy > When a bug is marked as fixed it doesn't show up in searches developers use so it's a matter of who reads the email and acts upon it. I don't see why maintainers would be any more likely to act than an arch team comprised of multiple people in the case of bigger arches. Let's not forget that users are really supposed to open new bugs instead of commenting on the resolved ones although I know there are users out there who rather comment on a two year old only distantly related bug than open a new one. Regards, Petteri signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Handling of keywording bugs with only one arch
On 03/12/2010 11:47 PM, William Hubbs wrote: > > Since all the arch team does is stabilize or keyword, the maintainer > needs to know if other issues come up with the bug after it is closed. > The maintainer is the reporter or in Cc. Regards, Petteri signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Handling of keywording bugs with only one arch
On 03/13/2010 07:07 PM, Petteri Räty wrote: > When a bug is marked as fixed it doesn't show up in searches developers > use so it's a matter of who reads the email and acts upon it. I don't > see why maintainers would be any more likely to act than an arch team > comprised of multiple people in the case of bigger arches. Let's not > forget that users are really supposed to open new bugs instead of > commenting on the resolved ones although I know there are users out > there who rather comment on a two year old only distantly related bug > than open a new one. I would love to see a bugzilla feature that would entirely disable commenting on closed bugs like on archlinux's bugtracking system[1] [1] http://www.mail-archive.com/arch-gene...@archlinux.org/msg11996.html That might possibly need "Request reopen" button of somesort, or we could just always require people to open new bugs Often people just wish to argue about the closing status, after the bug has been resolved...
Re: [gentoo-dev] Handling of keywording bugs with only one arch
On 03/13/2010 07:21 PM, Samuli Suominen wrote: > On 03/13/2010 07:07 PM, Petteri Räty wrote: >> When a bug is marked as fixed it doesn't show up in searches developers >> use so it's a matter of who reads the email and acts upon it. I don't >> see why maintainers would be any more likely to act than an arch team >> comprised of multiple people in the case of bigger arches. Let's not >> forget that users are really supposed to open new bugs instead of >> commenting on the resolved ones although I know there are users out >> there who rather comment on a two year old only distantly related bug >> than open a new one. > > I would love to see a bugzilla feature that would entirely disable > commenting on closed bugs like on archlinux's bugtracking system[1] > > [1] http://www.mail-archive.com/arch-gene...@archlinux.org/msg11996.html > > That might possibly need "Request reopen" button of somesort, or we > could just always require people to open new bugs > Maybe just modify Bugzilla so that there's a text besides the comment box or submit button saying that unless the fix is broken open a new bug. Regards, Petteri signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Handling of keywording bugs with only one arch
On 03/12/2010 08:18 PM, Petteri Räty wrote: > There seems to be two different schools on who to assign a keywording > bug with only a single arch. I have myself assigned it to the arch in > question but there's a difference of opinion here: > http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=272160#c5 > Let's get agreed on a single approach and I will add a note here: > http://devmanual.gentoo.org/keywording/index.html > I naturally support the approach I have been doing as I think the arch > team is the one in charge. > > Regards, > Petteri > I prefer the maintainer being the assignee. What about cases, where someone else does open that stable request bug? If the policy is to always assign it to the maintainer, he can still decide, if or when the packages is ready, else some stabilisation might be done, also the maintainer had still outstanding issues. -- Thomas Sachau Gentoo Linux Developer signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Handling of keywording bugs with only one arch
On 03/12/2010 09:18 PM, Petteri Räty wrote: > There seems to be two different schools on who to assign a keywording > bug with only a single arch. I have myself assigned it to the arch in > question but there's a difference of opinion here: > http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=272160#c5 > Let's get agreed on a single approach and I will add a note here: > http://devmanual.gentoo.org/keywording/index.html > I naturally support the approach I have been doing as I think the arch > team is the one in charge. > > Regards, > Petteri > So let's summarize for assigning to the single arch: Against (and my comments on why they don't apply): - Comments would only go to arch team after resolving: * maintainer is still in Cc or Reporter - Arch teams not in charge of fixing problems * If problems come up they deserve a new bug as a dependency * one bug per issue and a stabilization bug is about stabilization - Maintainer being able to decide when to go stable * Bug wranglers should still assign to maintainers for their ack * The maintainer assigns it to the arch team In support (and my comments in support): - Can be used as a gentle reminder for slacker arches - The arch teams are actually ones doing the work to resolve the bug * As they are the ones to mark it as resolved it makes sense for them to be the assignees So based on this I propose that I will write this down in appropriate places in to our documentation and commit a week from now. Please object if you don't agree and we can discuss some more. Regards, Petteri signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Handling of keywording bugs with only one arch
On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 04:26:46PM +0200, Petteri Räty wrote: > On 03/12/2010 09:18 PM, Petteri Räty wrote: > > There seems to be two different schools on who to assign a keywording > > bug with only a single arch. I have myself assigned it to the arch in > > question but there's a difference of opinion here: > > http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=272160#c5 > > Let's get agreed on a single approach and I will add a note here: > > http://devmanual.gentoo.org/keywording/index.html > > I naturally support the approach I have been doing as I think the arch > > team is the one in charge. > > > > Regards, > > Petteri > > > > So let's summarize for assigning to the single arch: > > Against (and my comments on why they don't apply): > - Comments would only go to arch team after resolving: > * maintainer is still in Cc or Reporter > - Arch teams not in charge of fixing problems > * If problems come up they deserve a new bug as a dependency > * one bug per issue and a stabilization bug is about stabilization > - Maintainer being able to decide when to go stable > * Bug wranglers should still assign to maintainers for their ack > * The maintainer assigns it to the arch team > > In support (and my comments in support): > - Can be used as a gentle reminder for slacker arches > - The arch teams are actually ones doing the work to resolve the bug > * As they are the ones to mark it as resolved it makes sense for them > to be the assignees > > So based on this I propose that I will write this down in appropriate > places in to our documentation and commit a week from now. Please object > if you don't agree and we can discuss some more. > > Regards, > Petteri The only reason I don't really like this is because it breaks consistency. We have a ground rule, assign to maintainer, CC arch(es). Why make it more complicated? I have a feeling people will continue CCing arches out of habit. Ofcourse, individual cases (such as slacking arches) can be handled independently. -- Alex Alexander :: wired Gentoo Developer www.linuxized.com pgpupeyfobUFd.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Handling of keywording bugs with only one arch
On 03/27/2010 04:51 PM, Alex Alexander wrote: > > The only reason I don't really like this is because it breaks > consistency. We have a ground rule, assign to maintainer, CC arch(es). > Why make it more complicated? I have a feeling people will continue > CCing arches out of habit. > I don't think we should punish people for not doing it this way but consider it the preferred way when doing new bugs. The initial point here was to tell arches that assigning bugs directly to them is not wrong. Regards, Petteri signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Handling of keywording bugs with only one arch
On Sat, 27 Mar 2010 17:07:26 +0200 Petteri Räty wrote: > On 03/27/2010 04:51 PM, Alex Alexander wrote: > > > > The only reason I don't really like this is because it breaks > > consistency. We have a ground rule, assign to maintainer, CC > > arch(es). Why make it more complicated? I have a feeling people > > will continue CCing arches out of habit. +1. > I don't think we should punish people for not doing it this way but > consider it the preferred way when doing new bugs. The initial point > here was to tell arches that assigning bugs directly to them is not > wrong. Not wrong, just annoying for the arch team in question. Before resolving the bug report, you'd reassign to the maintainer and then close it? Why change it around twice, or even once for that matter? jer
Re: [gentoo-dev] Handling of keywording bugs with only one arch
On 04/01/2010 11:28 PM, Jeroen Roovers wrote: > On Sat, 27 Mar 2010 17:07:26 +0200 > Petteri Räty wrote: > >> On 03/27/2010 04:51 PM, Alex Alexander wrote: >>> >>> The only reason I don't really like this is because it breaks >>> consistency. We have a ground rule, assign to maintainer, CC >>> arch(es). Why make it more complicated? I have a feeling people >>> will continue CCing arches out of habit. > > +1. > >> I don't think we should punish people for not doing it this way but >> consider it the preferred way when doing new bugs. The initial point >> here was to tell arches that assigning bugs directly to them is not >> wrong. > > Not wrong, just annoying for the arch team in question. Before > resolving the bug report, you'd reassign to the maintainer and then > close it? Why change it around twice, or even once for that matter? > > I don't think I have ever suggested this or then I have been misunderstood. Regards, Petteri signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
