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-40572-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>)
id 1Nysmu-00063i-1N
for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 05 Apr 2010 20:20:48 +0000
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8D570E08AA;
Mon, 5 Apr 2010 20:20:43 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-pw0-f53.google.com (mail-pw0-f53.google.com [209.85.160.53])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45CB5E088D
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Mon, 5 Apr 2010 20:20:26 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by pwj10 with SMTP id 10so2962194pwj.40
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Mon, 05 Apr 2010 13:20:25 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:sender:received:in-reply-to
:references:date:x-google-sender-auth:received:message-id:subject
:from:to:content-type;
bh=FOo+wkoyFWnqWnc4bjANrPijExpp8nhcy+0HwbGmg1w=;
b=o6iF1Xusb5tBeizRkb7Wf8+v0X+kdmZPhJf+3qWdJasCyEL8sAiKX4KXUmVQRvRov5
N0lYrwi4QzOB8huBc+29PYpGw5D5737ync4XmvFLybAq3uY/Az1HtMNlH/nv/tJQF+NC
jTWTCCxHhhU1ETBSnyusyjOecFscWdv6j4yh4=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date
:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type;
b=tnwv9JXZlFSCLLU3DMTbJA7hXhoeRHYH65NWsQi+DlMo5CCPHYXR9nDLzX9MRQZBSB
TFK+IgOQXXbWlaXHOFc4UWYruTpXme3lFE5zweVqb3UoorLtH2b/eOqZj3oy75/LohxI
xQC7pFf5ht09NRu2Hiv/L0JY37U3KcGdJBIZA=
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
Sender: nirbheek.chauhan@gmail.com
Received: by 10.140.191.19 with HTTP; Mon, 5 Apr 2010 13:20:25 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <r2l7c612fc61004051054y17dc8355n539caa61c3f98191@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4BB70F5E.7010101@gentoo.org>
<1270330558.15538.4.camel@keitaro.perronet.esiee.net>
<4BB85674.3070906@gentoo.org>
<w2r8b4c83ad1004040216rf9a72d4bse0b9bfa119e1619e@mail.gmail.com>
<r2l7c612fc61004051054y17dc8355n539caa61c3f98191@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2010 01:50:25 +0530
X-Google-Sender-Auth: 52494293865e1c2d
Received: by 10.141.105.19 with SMTP id h19mr1508000rvm.281.1270498825726;
Mon, 05 Apr 2010 13:20:25 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <k2m8b4c83ad1004051320t2dda07f1ge399b9c272c8bce4@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Should we disable RESOLVED LATER from bugzilla?
From: Nirbheek Chauhan <nirbheek@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Archives-Salt: 386fb5f6-b502-4b7c-9926-c11f4500f317
X-Archives-Hash: 5ddea03c0b58436e9c3ccc95ee251859
On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 11:24 PM, Denis Dupeyron <calchan@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 3:16 AM, Nirbheek Chauhan <nirbheek@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
>> I see no reason whatsoever to keep it open.
>
> How about this one: preventing users from filing dupes.
>
We already advise our users to check RESO bugs before filing bugs; and
the advice seems to have trickled down quite well, and users only file
duplicate bugs once before getting the idea. Overall, IMO it has
worked. We only keep a single bug open for the entire GNOME 2.xx so
people don't file dupes for that (we get a lot of dupes for that, but
not specific packages).
>> If we
>> start doing that, we'll end up with tons of extra bugs on our hands.
>
> What's the big deal? You know you'll be adding/bumping the package at
> some point. Just close the bug when you do so. It's certainly less
> work than marking it RESOLVED FIXED once and then DUPLICATE many times
> after that.
>
> The point of bugzilla is tracking bugs, not a tool to arbitrate a
> pissing contest about who has the least bugs open. If you can't/don't
> want to fix a bug that's OK, but it's not a good enough reason to
> pretend it never existed.
>
That's not the point; as I have explained above; our purpose is to
prevent bug reports for packages that will go in with the major
release from being filed. We usually have a [Tracker] bug open for the
major release anyway; so the choice is either RESO DUPLICATE against
that, or RESO LATER.
We often do the latter to prevent noise on the tracker bug, or if it
hasn't been filed yet, and the user is doing a stupid zero day bump
request (or a development version bump request).
For packages that are not in the gnome set, or gnome external deps
set, we obviously keep the bump request bug open.
--
~Nirbheek Chauhan
Gentoo GNOME+Mozilla Team