On 24 Apr 2013 01:22, Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com wrote:
On 22/04/13 10:55 AM, Rave it wrote:
Am Mon, 22 Apr 2013 16:37:34 +
schrieb devel-requ...@lists.fedoraproject.org:
For me as compiz maintainer those info's are complete useless whithout
having more infomation what the
On Mon, 2013-04-22 at 17:48 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Mon, 22 Apr 2013 19:55:02 +0200
Rave it chat-to...@raveit.de wrote:
Am Mon, 22 Apr 2013 16:37:34 +
schrieb devel-requ...@lists.fedoraproject.org:
For me as compiz maintainer those info's are complete useless whithout
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 12:48 AM, Kevin Fenzi ke...@scrye.com wrote:
On Mon, 22 Apr 2013 19:55:02 +0200
Rave it chat-to...@raveit.de wrote:
Am Mon, 22 Apr 2013 16:37:34 +
schrieb devel-requ...@lists.fedoraproject.org:
For me as compiz maintainer those info's are complete useless
Am Montag, den 22.04.2013, 16:05 +0200 schrieb Richard Marko:
More feedback is welcome.
1. Announce changes like this one in advance on devel-announce.
2. Provide some documentation about FAF. What do these bugs mean to
developers and package maintainers. hat are we supposed
On 04/23/2013 05:27 PM, Christoph Wickert wrote:
Am Montag, den 22.04.2013, 16:05 +0200 schrieb Richard Marko:
More feedback is welcome.
1. Announce changes like this one in advance on devel-announce.
I will.
2. Provide some documentation about FAF. What do these bugs mean to
On 22/04/13 10:55 AM, Rave it wrote:
Am Mon, 22 Apr 2013 16:37:34 +
schrieb devel-requ...@lists.fedoraproject.org:
For me as compiz maintainer those info's are complete useless whithout
having more infomation what the user did if abrt would trigered.
Maybe thy played arround without
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 1:24 PM, Dan Mashal dan.mas...@gmail.com wrote:
Seems like someone turned on a bot this morning. Just a heads up..
these have [faf] in the subject line and seem to be filing bugs on old
components (for me at least). Looks like it's just starting to make
the rounds. Who
On 04/22/2013 02:24 PM, Dan Mashal wrote:
Seems like someone turned on a bot this morning. Just a heads up..
these have [faf] in the subject line and seem to be filing bugs on old
components (for me at least). Looks like it's just starting to make
the rounds. Who owns this?
Dan
Yes, we did
On 04/22/2013 06:24 AM, Dan Mashal wrote:
Seems like someone turned on a bot this morning. Just a heads up..
these have [faf] in the subject line and seem to be filing bugs on old
components (for me at least). Looks like it's just starting to make
the rounds. Who owns this?
Dan
I also find
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 8:05 AM, Richard Marko rma...@redhat.com wrote:
Yes, we did that and started filing bugs for everything that seemed
worth (even old stuff). After initial sync between bugzilla and faf
server it won't create as much tickets for old components as it does now
which is
Am Mon, 22 Apr 2013 16:37:34 +
schrieb devel-requ...@lists.fedoraproject.org:
For me as compiz maintainer those info's are complete useless whithout
having more infomation what the user did if abrt would trigered.
Maybe thy played arround without knowledge about the programm and did
wrong
On Mon, 22 Apr 2013 19:55:02 +0200
Rave it chat-to...@raveit.de wrote:
Am Mon, 22 Apr 2013 16:37:34 +
schrieb devel-requ...@lists.fedoraproject.org:
For me as compiz maintainer those info's are complete useless whithout
having more infomation what the user did if abrt would trigered.
12 matches
Mail list logo
