On Sat, 31 May 2008 01:14:16 +0200 Stefan Potyra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Hi folks, > >as overheard on #ubuntu-devel today, please don't use one bug with many >different tasks for transitions. The problem with this is, that any >subscriber of an affected package will get every mail for a change in that >bug (in short: [he/she'll get] "zillion mails" [in which he/she has] "no >interest in"[1]).
I think this is an unfortunate aspect of the curent LP design. >For what tasks are not meant to be used, I'll give you this quotation: "if the >fixes required would be independent, they should be separate bugs" [2] I don't understand. By definition all packages that need changes to fix a bug will be different. If I understand this statement, then also affect should never be used for different packages. This isn't what I would have expected. >Finally, one option to handle transitions via LP was also proposed: "it's >easier to file [separate] bugs and tag those" [3]. > Tags have their own problems (see recent discussions on ubuntu-devel). I'd say it's much harder. One mass bug is one email. One bug per package is one email per package. I don't think LP currently offers a good solution for this type of problem. Scott K -- Ubuntu-motu mailing list Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
