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 <gentoo-dev+bounces-40036-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>)
	id 1NqUpe-0005ve-4N
	for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 13 Mar 2010 17:08:58 +0000
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5EB6CE0BB9;
	Sat, 13 Mar 2010 17:08:55 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from petteriraty.eu (host.petteriraty.eu [188.40.80.83])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3924DE0B5C
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Sat, 13 Mar 2010 17:08:48 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [82.130.46.229] (qob5.kyla.fi [82.130.46.229])
	by petteriraty.eu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9251633E3D
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Sat, 13 Mar 2010 17:08:47 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <4B9BC65D.9000504@gentoo.org>
Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2010 19:07:41 +0200
From: =?UTF-8?B?UGV0dGVyaSBSw6R0eQ==?= <betelgeuse@gentoo.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; fi; rv:1.8.1.23) Gecko/20090916 Thunderbird/2.0.0.23 Mnenhy/0.7.6.666
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Handling of keywording bugs with only one arch
References: <4B9A936B.3070804@gentoo.org> <e8a2d32ba4bc39ee8c0d7eb43092bede@jolexa.net>
In-Reply-To: <e8a2d32ba4bc39ee8c0d7eb43092bede@jolexa.net>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0.1
OpenPGP: id=B8E4ECF0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
 protocol="application/pgp-signature";
 boundary="------------enig38B74B7EDE777EE7DD50FDB6"
X-Archives-Salt: adb8d75d-c3bb-4992-9b6e-fe482d3d375f
X-Archives-Hash: 9a4fecee8c39fa0168c48262d9508678

This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156)
--------------enig38B74B7EDE777EE7DD50FDB6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 03/12/2010 10:11 PM, Jeremy Olexa wrote:
>=20
> On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 21:18:03 +0200, Petteri R=C3=A4ty <betelgeuse@gento=
o.org>
> 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 commen=
ts
> 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 comm=
ent
> basically goes to /dev/null. So, if we are to improve the user experien=
ce,
> assign to maintainer and CC arch team.
>=20
> -Jeremy
>=20

When a bug is marked as fixed it doesn't show up in searches developers
use so it's a matter of who reads the email and acts upon it. I don't
see why maintainers would be any more likely to act than an arch team
comprised of multiple people in the case of bigger arches. Let's not
forget that users are really supposed to open new bugs instead of
commenting on the resolved ones although I know there are users out
there who rather comment on a two year old only distantly related bug
than open a new one.

Regards,
Petteri


--------------enig38B74B7EDE777EE7DD50FDB6
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
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=Cehx
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--------------enig38B74B7EDE777EE7DD50FDB6--