From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NqChY-00019v-3i for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 12 Mar 2010 21:47:24 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id BB80BE08F4; Fri, 12 Mar 2010 21:47:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-yx0-f177.google.com (mail-yx0-f177.google.com [209.85.210.177]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A11FFE08D6 for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2010 21:47:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: by yxe7 with SMTP id 7so68243yxe.32 for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2010 13:47:11 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:sender:received:date:from:to :subject:message-id:mail-followup-to:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=iUsn0TPY+HvhIxMNtc0H0qp344U64/UN4O/3gJhhc48=; b=ZVeuxxxDAJO0LL0tJcpDJR0UbgrdkUtZ09IIMyaQNQjgM/9MnCklCtQ/Z7B73e/GjM XFyqVOBz0CnzsiFSkxNLq7lEoEsMXaTddaCtyW3PHzwdmASXlKn6zmafK91sK7N7SRps LYjOhjgC+sHwew8aWAolAIQ0Cx0fARnjwRtt4= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=sender:date:from:to:subject:message-id:mail-followup-to:references :mime-version:content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to :user-agent; b=IWoN47srsF+8vAvyh0xUkNRaTC2BcWRieWGT/xg/W5FWDylDb1EIYVKNbnbjPFmIjY XbKpVN71qNEnaSwD+6QRorcIgMR6C7ye9Y8VfP5S1iV6Qj+ITIwKMimxl9E7OqwBRVZL 032HkLSy0oSXsKFaUrhzUZUwsrrQnULogIiuo= Received: by 10.101.155.38 with SMTP id h38mr1919947ano.131.1268430428924; Fri, 12 Mar 2010 13:47:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from linux1 (cpe-76-183-49-63.tx.res.rr.com [76.183.49.63]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 14sm1024790gxk.15.2010.03.12.13.47.06 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Fri, 12 Mar 2010 13:47:07 -0800 (PST) Sender: William Hubbs Received: by linux1 (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri, 12 Mar 2010 15:47:05 -0600 Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 15:47:05 -0600 From: William Hubbs To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Handling of keywording bugs with only one arch Message-ID: <20100312214705.GA5761@linux1> Mail-Followup-To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org References: <4B9A936B.3070804@gentoo.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="ReaqsoxgOBHFXBhH" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-Archives-Salt: 7bcc2011-8ff8-49c4-981f-b31428d33ae6 X-Archives-Hash: ecbe35fac017d6d76d6e7d85ce9abcd4 --ReaqsoxgOBHFXBhH Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 08:11:50PM +0000, Jeremy Olexa wrote: >=20 > 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=3D272160#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. >=20 > 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 --ReaqsoxgOBHFXBhH Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkuatlkACgkQblQW9DDEZTjlvQCgoSRDB2qVpzytz8+559dttBTJ t9EAnApE6LLrf/KKDxBmo8T+MdZuLWTo =uZBa -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --ReaqsoxgOBHFXBhH--