From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1I6yeU-0005ay-Q4 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 07 Jul 2007 00:59:59 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with SMTP id l670wvhP018292; Sat, 7 Jul 2007 00:58:57 GMT Received: from py-out-1112.google.com (py-out-1112.google.com [64.233.166.181]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id l670uwLc015995 for ; Sat, 7 Jul 2007 00:56:59 GMT Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id d32so806894pye for ; Fri, 06 Jul 2007 17:56:58 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=G2TL2u9no8lN6rkoNqIQ35rNTGeQoTb10XgJkPnTYiXrdYfzLXnlCmzMLW3oA+rNDcPVvwRLcuiTBymw0NB7NAqDrUrD80o9NFJRjPxkBJu1LYC2ogafFH1rexu/TtNZUsA/YUKUW1sQDR2M/jRlFdHQmpT2o7agyD3Hvzxdo2o= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=NEl3UxSRSjcL61SCZjLnpSUZaBGvkpJaDjEz1MCw10oH6vG6SeHGBIYWHTHhn9bEU8wDzJKho56NprHeJ3CA7qHcWdpx43CKUy8mRadOgBOHObjDECFrX/yCrsSIHNCzHPcSKBW2UdyypqWcPRxuH/a5dgeNi9g3cKtBicp6w3g= Received: by 10.64.184.16 with SMTP id h16mr2064175qbf.1183769818379; Fri, 06 Jul 2007 17:56:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.64.251.15 with HTTP; Fri, 6 Jul 2007 17:56:58 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <8cd1ed20707061756h41f18bc2nb2e3be1bafce1e15@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2007 12:56:58 +1200 From: "Kent Fredric" To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Feedback req: Confirm/thank on bug fix or is that unwanted bug spam? In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: X-Archives-Salt: e0529a41-3b84-4043-8792-7f0e615886f3 X-Archives-Hash: 7720ffe32845d28170db68a19676f529 On 7/7/07, Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> wrote: > When I open or CC on a bug that then gets fixed, I often feel like adding > a thanks to the bug. However, while it may be polite in other > circumstances, in this case it could be viewed as bug spam, so I've > hesitated. > > I reviewed the bug reporting guidelines a month or so ago and didn't see > anything either way on it there, so I'm wondering, what's the general > opinion? Do you guys appreciate thanks (and confirmation the fix worked > at the same time, even when it's fairly obvious it should), or would you > rather not get the spam? > > If there's a consensus reached, perhaps it should be added to the bug > reporting guidelines as well. I'm sure I'm not the only one who has > wondered about this. > > What I've done occasionally so far is this. Gentoo tends to leave the > bug state in resolved/fixed. When I can confirm it, I'll close the bug, > with an appropriate note of confirmation and thanks. Does that work or > is it still too bug-spammy? Again, if there's a reasonable consensus, > it'd be nice to have it mentioned one way or the other in the bug > reporting guidelines. > I /believe/ when you close a bug a notification is sent anyway irregardless of whether or not you add a comment, but i might be wrong here. I myself think dev's should be thanked for their good work and would like to continue doing so :) ( something has to be done to compensate for the amount of crap i bet dev's get, recognition occasionally IMO should help them feel loved and want to stay here at gentoo :) ) -- Kent ruby -e '[1, 2, 4, 7, 0, 9, 5, 8, 3, 10, 11, 6, 12, 13].each{|x| print "enNOSPicAMreil kdrtf@gma.com"[(2*x)..(2*x+1)]}' -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list