[gentoo-dev] Closing bugs on masked packages

[gentoo-dev] Closing bugs on masked packages

[Ryan Hill]

Hey all,

just a friendly request:  If you do happen to mask a package for
removal, please do not close any bugs against the package on the basis
that it's being removed.  There have been several cases where bugs get
closed WONTFIX or INVALID, the removal is reversed for whatever reason,
and the bugs fall through the cracks.  Once the package is actually
deleted, the person removing it should go through bugzie and close any
open bugs.

Thanks.


-- 
dirtyepic                 salesman said this vacuum's guaranteed
 gentoo org          it could suck an ancient virus from the sea
  9B81 6C9F E791 83BB 3AB3  5B2D E625 A073 8379 37E8 (0x837937E8)

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Closing bugs on masked packages

[Petteri Räty]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 594 bytes --]

Ryan Hill kirjoitti:
> Hey all,
> 
> just a friendly request:  If you do happen to mask a package for
> removal, please do not close any bugs against the package on the basis
> that it's being removed.  There have been several cases where bugs get
> closed WONTFIX or INVALID, the removal is reversed for whatever reason,
> and the bugs fall through the cracks.  Once the package is actually
> deleted, the person removing it should go through bugzie and close any
> open bugs.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> 

Yeh the PMASKED KEYWORD is for packages waiting removal.

Regards,
Petteri


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 252 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Closing bugs on masked packages

[Donnie Berkholz]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 387 bytes --]

On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 21:28:44 +0300
Petteri Räty <betelgeuse@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Yeh the PMASKED KEYWORD is for packages waiting removal.

Is there some place people are supposed to find out about this stuff?
I've seen two random Bugzilla keywords mentioned in here in the past
week or so as if they were common knowledge, and I've never heard of
them before.

Thanks,
Donnie

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Closing bugs on masked packages

[Petteri Räty]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 583 bytes --]

Donnie Berkholz kirjoitti:
> On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 21:28:44 +0300
> Petteri Räty <betelgeuse@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> Yeh the PMASKED KEYWORD is for packages waiting removal.
> 
> Is there some place people are supposed to find out about this stuff?
> I've seen two random Bugzilla keywords mentioned in here in the past
> week or so as if they were common knowledge, and I've never heard of
> them before.
> 
> Thanks,
> Donnie

Yes. When you click the Keywords link it takes you to a description page:
https://bugs.gentoo.org/describekeywords.cgi

Regards,
Petteri


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 252 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Closing bugs on masked packages

[Donnie Berkholz]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 389 bytes --]

On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 22:02:28 +0300
Petteri Räty <betelgeuse@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Yes. When you click the Keywords link it takes you to a description
> page: https://bugs.gentoo.org/describekeywords.cgi

Sure, I'm aware of that. But where do I hear about the addition of new
ones? Am I supposed to randomly check the descriptions to see whether
they've shown up?

Thanks,
Donnie

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Closing bugs on masked packages

[Petteri Räty]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 599 bytes --]

Donnie Berkholz kirjoitti:
> On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 22:02:28 +0300
> Petteri Räty <betelgeuse@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> Yes. When you click the Keywords link it takes you to a description
>> page: https://bugs.gentoo.org/describekeywords.cgi
> 
> Sure, I'm aware of that. But where do I hear about the addition of new
> ones? Am I supposed to randomly check the descriptions to see whether
> they've shown up?
> 
> Thanks,
> Donnie

Well ideally they would be discussed on gentoo-dev before addition and
that was done in the case of STABLEREQ KEYWORDREQ for example.

Regards,
Petteri


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 252 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] Re: Closing bugs on masked packages

[Ryan Hill]

Petteri Räty wrote:
> Donnie Berkholz kirjoitti:
>> Petteri Räty <betelgeuse@gentoo.org> wrote:

>>> Yes. When you click the Keywords link it takes you to a description
>>> page: https://bugs.gentoo.org/describekeywords.cgi

>> Sure, I'm aware of that. But where do I hear about the addition of new
>> ones? Am I supposed to randomly check the descriptions to see whether
>> they've shown up?

> Well ideally they would be discussed on gentoo-dev before addition and
> that was done in the case of STABLEREQ KEYWORDREQ for example.

We really need to document some of this stuff.  PMASKED and the bit i
posted about not closing bugs is part of the Treecleaners Policy*, but
it should probably make it into the devmanual at some point.  Maybe I'll
see about writing something up.

* http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/qa/treecleaners/policy.xml

-- 
dirtyepic                 salesman said this vacuum's guaranteed
 gentoo org          it could suck an ancient virus from the sea
  9B81 6C9F E791 83BB 3AB3  5B2D E625 A073 8379 37E8 (0x837937E8)

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Closing bugs on masked packages

[Mart Raudsepp]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1222 bytes --]

On P, 2007-07-01 at 12:22 -0600, Ryan Hill wrote:
> Hey all,
> 
> just a friendly request:  If you do happen to mask a package for
> removal, please do not close any bugs against the package on the basis
> that it's being removed.  There have been several cases where bugs get
> closed WONTFIX or INVALID, the removal is reversed for whatever reason,
> and the bugs fall through the cracks.  Once the package is actually
> deleted, the person removing it should go through bugzie and close any
> open bugs.

I've been operating on the premise that I am the maintainer of the
package in question and marking it as WONTFIX and making it depend on
the removal bug while at it. I don't see what's wrong in that..
If the removal gets reverted, all the depending bugs should be seen and
acted upon. Why should we keep bugs open in our maintainer bugs list if
we are 99% sure the package will get removed? We aren't treecleaners
project, but the maintainers of the packages whose bug we are marking
WONTFIX with the almost certain assumption the package will get removed
soon...


-- 
With Regards,
Mart Raudsepp
Gentoo Developer
Mail: leio@gentoo.org
Weblog: http://planet.gentoo.org/developers/leio

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] Re: Closing bugs on masked packages

[Ryan Hill]

Mart Raudsepp wrote:

> I've been operating on the premise that I am the maintainer of the
> package in question and marking it as WONTFIX and making it depend on
> the removal bug while at it. I don't see what's wrong in that..
> If the removal gets reverted, all the depending bugs should be seen and
> acted upon. Why should we keep bugs open in our maintainer bugs list if
> we are 99% sure the package will get removed? We aren't treecleaners
> project, but the maintainers of the packages whose bug we are marking
> WONTFIX with the almost certain assumption the package will get removed
> soon...

Even if you are the maintainer, it's far from unheard of that when
someone finds their favorite package has been masked they pop up and
offer to take it off your hands.  That's besides the point though.  My
mail was more concerning packages that don't have a dedicated maintainer
caring for them.  I should have been more clear about that.  Anyways,
the goal here is to keep bugs from getting lost.  As long as there's
some mechanism in place to prevent that from happening it shouldn't
matter how its implemented.  I don't really get why some ppl can't stand
having open bugs, but hey. ;)


-- 
dirtyepic                 salesman said this vacuum's guaranteed
 gentoo org          it could suck an ancient virus from the sea
  9B81 6C9F E791 83BB 3AB3  5B2D E625 A073 8379 37E8 (0x837937E8)

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list