On Sat, 17 Jul 2010 10:43:00 +0200
Gert van den Berg wrote:
> It might be a good idea to try and get most potential bug reports
> discussed on the forum first?
>
That's what I meant when I suggested adding a line above the comment box (or
anywhere on the page that seems suitable). Some users
On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 10:27, David Gerard wrote:
> You are going to get noise. Stopping people reporting bugs is probably
> not the answer. It's hard enough to get bug reports out of people
> already.
A "Where do I" (of "What do I do when...") section in the FAQ
might help in some cases? (w
On 17 July 2010 03:56, James McKenzie wrote:
> Does this sound doable and is it permissible? I don't want folks walking
> away because they cannot post, but if they are posting garbage it doesn't
> help us.
It depends also on the balance you want between
(a) the possibility of a bad comment o
Michael Stefaniuc wrote:
Austin English wrote:
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 9:30 PM, James McKenzie
wrote:
Rosanne DiMesio wrote:
On Thu, 15 Jul 2010 17:08:30 +0200
Gert van den Berg wrote:
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 16:23, James Mckenzie
wrote:
Rosanne and y
> Very BAD:
> -
> Changelog: This fixes bug #4711
>
> BAD:
>
> Changelog: Change the handling of flags X Y Z because this fixes bug #4711
>
> OK:
> ---
> Changelog: Change a corner case in the handling of flags X Y Z (with tests).
> This resolve the issue from bug #4711.
On 07/16/2010 03:50 PM, Dan Kegel wrote:
So it boils down to disagreements about two things:
- mentioning a bug number when posting a patch
I think this is a misunderstanding. There are different ways of adding
the bug number when posting a patch:
Very BAD:
-
Changelog: This fixes bug
On 16 July 2010 16:31, Dan Kegel wrote:
> Without actual examples, I can't see what you're objecting to.
There are three specific examples in this thread, two of those were
provided by yourself, one was by me. If you read carefully you can
probably find them. I also explicitly spelled the issue ou
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 7:08 AM, Henri Verbeet wrote:
> No, you're mistaking specific instances for the larger issue there.
> What it boils down to is giving bad advice from a perceived position
> of authority. Please don't make me search through the archives to find
> every single specific instan
Luke Benstead wrote:
>Sent: Jul 16, 2010 7:18 AM
>To: Henri Verbeet
>Cc: wine-devel@winehq.org, Dan Kegel
>Subject: Re: Please remove / block user from bugzilla
>
>> How do frequent wine committers, and especially Alexandre, feel about
>> > these two issues?
>
> How do frequent wine committers, and especially Alexandre, feel about
> > these two issues?
> I'd say Alexandre's opinion is pretty clear, as always:
> http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-devel/2010-February/081744.html.
>
>
That's doesn't settle this at all, Alexandre is almost certainly referr
On 16 July 2010 15:50, Dan Kegel wrote:
> So it boils down to disagreements about two things:
>
> - mentioning a bug number when posting a patch
>
> - turning spammy FIXMEs into oneshots
>
No, you're mistaking specific instances for the larger issue there.
What it boils down to is giving bad advic
So it boils down to disagreements about two things:
- mentioning a bug number when posting a patch
- turning spammy FIXMEs into oneshots
These both seem like things reasonable developers could disagree about.
(Indeed, Roderick recently posted a patch with a bug number in the subject line,
http:/
On 16 July 2010 14:10, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> I am confused. Following this list only, I so far did not notice someone
> saying "don't tell the bug number" (ok, might be my fault), but a few
> times asking the question "does this patch fix an actual" bug. Also,
> SubmittingPatches says:
>
> ===
>
>
> For reference, there are two basic reasons for not referring to
> bugzilla when sending patches, in the commit log or otherwise. The
> first one is that patches should stand on their own. If the bug
> contains important information that's relevant to the patch, that
> should be included directly
On 16 July 2010 12:26, Luke Benstead wrote:
> Probably not my place to wade in here, but that's not true, he didn't
> mention the commit log:
>
> "Be sure to mention in the post that it fixes
>
> http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=21233";
>
> I'm pretty sure he meant in the email when he email
> > - Misha; I told him tests were ok to submit during a code freeze; this is
> true,
> > given that Alexandre accepted tests as last as last Friday. I should
> have
> > told him that tests which add stubs probably aren't ok, but he learned
> > that as soon as he submitted.
> > http://www.winehq.o
On 15 July 2010 17:45, Dan Kegel wrote:
> I'm listening. Can you give some examples of problems I've caused?
> Candidates include
>
> - the FIXME_ONCE guy; I think you and I are giving him the same advice;
> http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-devel/2010-July/085069.html
> so that seems fine.
>
Austin English wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 9:30 PM, James McKenzie
> wrote:
>> Rosanne DiMesio wrote:
>>> On Thu, 15 Jul 2010 17:08:30 +0200
>>> Gert van den Berg wrote:
>>>
>>>
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 16:23, James Mckenzie
wrote:
> Rosanne and you have a good point, but
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 9:30 PM, James McKenzie
wrote:
> Rosanne DiMesio wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 15 Jul 2010 17:08:30 +0200
>> Gert van den Berg wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 16:23, James Mckenzie
>>> wrote:
>>>
Rosanne and you have a good point, but I would restrict it the
Rosanne DiMesio wrote:
On Thu, 15 Jul 2010 17:08:30 +0200
Gert van den Berg wrote:
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 16:23, James Mckenzie
wrote:
Rosanne and you have a good point, but I would restrict it the limit to four
lines. You should be able to describe a valid bug in that space. Any
James Mckenzie wrote:
> On that vein of thought, why don't we have a code standard page? I've been
> asking this question and maybe this should be my next area of concern after
> the release of Wine 1.2 and the reinput of my patches. This way, I can use
> my 'years of expertise' and what I've l
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 8:45 AM, Dan Kegel wrote:
> - the FIXME_ONCE guy; I think you and I are giving him the same advice;
> http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-devel/2010-July/085069.html
> so that seems fine.
Aha. This is the thread that probably bothered you:
http://www.winehq.org/pipermail
Am 15.07.2010 18:29, schrieb James Mckenzie:
> On that vein of thought, why don't we have a code standard page? I've been
> asking this question and maybe this should be my next area of concern after
> the release of Wine 1.2 and the reinput of my patches. This way, I can use
> my 'years of ex
On Thu, 15 Jul 2010 17:08:30 +0200
Gert van den Berg wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 16:23, James Mckenzie
> wrote:
> > Rosanne and you have a good point, but I would restrict it the limit to
> > four lines. You should be able to describe a valid bug in that space.
> > Anything more, and it
Henri Verbeet wrote:
>
>On 14 July 2010 16:26, Dan Kegel wrote:
>> If you ask me,
>> http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6971#c371
>> is more objectionable, because it shows the Wine
>> community to be ill-mannered and hostile to newbies.
>Sure, it could have been worded more carefully, but I
On Thu, 15 Jul 2010 07:09:22 -0700
Dan Kegel wrote:
>
> As you point out, people don't read... it might be more useful to
> put a length limit check so that posting a long comment requires
> privileges. Maybe that could be done as simply as "if this is user's
> first bug, don't let him post mor
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 7:45 AM, Henri Verbeet wrote:
> However, if we're talking about being harmful to the project, I think
> it's far more insidious and actively harmful to pretend being an
> active / respected Wine developer and giving potential new developers
> bad advice from that position.
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 16:23, James Mckenzie
wrote:
> Rosanne and you have a good point, but I would restrict it the limit to four
> lines. You should be able to describe a valid bug in that space. Anything
> more, and it becomes an attachement.
4 lines is horribly short... Especially for po
On 14 July 2010 16:26, Dan Kegel wrote:
> If you ask me,
> http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6971#c371
> is more objectionable, because it shows the Wine
> community to be ill-mannered and hostile to newbies.
Sure, it could have been worded more carefully, but I don't buy the
"taints us all"
>> Would it be possible to add a line to the text above the comment entry box
>> (by the "do not paste logs" warning) telling people more explicitly what
>> sorts
>> of comments are appropriate, and directing them to the forum for user
>> support?
>> Yes, I know some people will ignore it anyway,
Rosanne wrote:
> A lot of new users mistake bugzilla for a support forum, and bug reports are
> littered with comments that don't belong there.
Yes, that's a problem.
> Would it be possible to add a line to the text above the comment entry box
> (by the "do not paste logs" warning) telling people
On Wed, 14 Jul 2010 07:26:40 -0700
Dan Kegel wrote:
> I only see one post from him ever, and he was *trying* to be
> helpful. Everybody should get a few chances. A warning
> should suffice.
>
Dan,
A lot of new users mistake bugzilla for a support forum, and bug reports are
littered with com
Am 14.07.2010 16:26, schrieb Dan Kegel:
> I only see one post from him ever, and he was *trying* to be
> helpful. Everybody should get a few chances. A warning
> should suffice.
>
> If you ask me,
> http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6971#c371
> is more objectionable, because it shows the W
I only see one post from him ever, and he was *trying* to be
helpful. Everybody should get a few chances. A warning
should suffice.
If you ask me,
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6971#c371
is more objectionable, because it shows the Wine
community to be ill-mannered and hostile to newbie
Austin English wrote:
>Sent: Jul 13, 2010 10:57 PM
>To: Vitaliy Margolen
>Cc: Wine Develop , matthewdchish...@gmail.com
>Subject: Re: Please remove / block user from bugzilla
>
>On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 11:12 PM, Vitaliy Margolen
> wrote:
>> Please remove Matt Chishol
On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 11:12 PM, Vitaliy Margolen
wrote:
> Please remove Matt Chisholm from bugazilla
> and/or block him from posting. Also please remove this post:
> http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6971#c370
>
> Vitaliy.
(Repeating my comment from the bug):
While I agree that comment d
36 matches
Mail list logo
