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 1H6yLr-0006BS-7h for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 17 Jan 2007 00:08:27 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.8) with SMTP id l0H07c37025759; Wed, 17 Jan 2007 00:07:38 GMT Received: from wr-out-0506.google.com (wr-out-0506.google.com [64.233.184.231]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l0H07bxQ001551 for ; Wed, 17 Jan 2007 00:07:37 GMT Received: by wr-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id i31so1638601wra for ; Tue, 16 Jan 2007 16:07:35 -0800 (PST) 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:references; b=s2ZLbgaWMrAnSK4SeDuasVIPttE39hkEGFYMf9R7rAzwR4QE9/PPZoL4FW65TjVCvFnLdZ40AETXLaeIPA+RxYCal6zwgWfQ6UG4YYBnbDspnJJbWcq8Yo5gIHuE4Dkh6bDqxmhvJFwSjDSHdfOvbEt2ED7dTAHzo49tGdQKEYs= Received: by 10.90.118.8 with SMTP id q8mr5356442agc.1168992454744; Tue, 16 Jan 2007 16:07:34 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.90.93.9 with HTTP; Tue, 16 Jan 2007 16:07:34 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <93e475bc0701161607s5ca219fcx1a03cca7f6acbfc3@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 13:07:34 +1300 From: "Alistair Bush" To: gentoo-java@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-java] Weka package cleanup In-Reply-To: <1168990676.13072.8.camel@wlt.obsidian-studios.com> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-java@gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_89839_2551301.1168992454675" References: <93e475bc0701161132s19786436p8b241e22a163ec68@mail.gmail.com> <45AD2FBB.5040001@gentoo.org> <9e0cf0bf0701161234u48924125t1067de35252c6371@mail.gmail.com> <45AD3AE8.6020402@gentoo.org> <9e0cf0bf0701161255s695622abi19922367aa57799f@mail.gmail.com> <93e475bc0701161453y2488c4al4dae0e787a703b27@mail.gmail.com> <1168990676.13072.8.camel@wlt.obsidian-studios.com> X-Archives-Salt: 42d36450-16d2-4d58-8f06-b3357862a0d4 X-Archives-Hash: 83be0354a98e26c71191c19cd872b046 ------=_Part_89839_2551301.1168992454675 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline mmm.... yes java@gentoo.org would be a good place instead of here to email it. Basically the aim I have for this is too draw the attention of you dev's to bugs that are a 'quick' fix. Therefore meeting the aim of closing bugs without you guys having to do most of the investigation... I have also though of going thru bugs.gentoo.org and reassigning the priority of bugs into categories (rather a large job for anyone who has other projects they want to get kicking). eg (as a very ruff guess) So P1 would be for security exploits and the like. P2 would be for ebuild related buys P3 ebuild request P4 ebuild request that are extremely difficult (or just can't happen because of lack of resources) P5 (something even worse than above) I also believe that there should be some bugs marked as WONTFIX, CANTFIX. For example jboss https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=148383 and https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=66965 I believe, and it will be interesting in hereing your views on this, that bugs should only be open if they are actually going to be worked on. With jboss we now have a binary ebuild in the overlay that could replace the existing versions and these jboss bugs could be closed. What do you guys think? Alistair (ali_bush) On 1/17/07, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote: > > On Wed, 2007-01-17 at 11:53 +1300, Alistair Bush wrote: > > How about I start opening bugs on bugs that have already been fixed > > but not closed :) > > Hmm not sure about that. Buggzie seems stable these days, but still > might be excessive use. Would like to know what others think about that. > > > something like > > > > Bug #123456 is open even tho its been fixed. > > > > I wonder what the bug-wranglers would like of that :D > > Well another route would be to email bug #, and comments to > java@gentoo.org Then the first dev that gets the email can take comments > add to bug and close the one. Instead of having to close and comment on > two :) > > To expand that, you could email over a list of bug #s with comments, to > kill more than one bird with a single stone. ;) > > -- > William L. Thomson Jr. > Gentoo/Java > > > ------=_Part_89839_2551301.1168992454675 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline mmm.... yes java@gentoo.org would be a good place instead of here to email it.

Basically the aim I have for this is too draw the attention of you dev's to bugs that are a 'quick' fix.

Therefore meeting the aim of closing bugs without you guys having to do most of the investigation...

I have also though of going thru bugs.gentoo.org and reassigning the priority of bugs into categories (rather a large job for anyone who has other projects they want to get kicking).

eg (as a very ruff guess)
So P1 would be for security exploits and the like.
P2 would be for ebuild related buys
P3 ebuild request
P4 ebuild request that are extremely difficult (or just can't happen because of lack of resources)
P5 (something even worse than above)

I also believe that there should be some bugs marked as WONTFIX, CANTFIX.

For example jboss https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=148383 and https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=66965

I believe, and it will be interesting in hereing your views on this, that bugs should only be open if they are actually going to be worked on.  With jboss we now have a binary ebuild in the overlay that could replace the existing versions and these jboss bugs could be closed.

What do you guys think?

Alistair (ali_bush)


On 1/17/07, William L. Thomson Jr. <wltjr@gentoo.org > wrote:
On Wed, 2007-01-17 at 11:53 +1300, Alistair Bush wrote:
> How about I start opening bugs on bugs that have already been fixed
> but not closed :)

Hmm not sure about that. Buggzie seems stable these days, but still
might be excessive use. Would like to know what others think about that.

> something like
>
> Bug #123456 is open even tho its been fixed.
>
> I wonder what the bug-wranglers would like of that :D

Well another route would be to email bug #, and comments to
java@gentoo.org Then the first dev that gets the email can take comments
add to bug and close the one. Instead of having to close and comment on
two :)

To expand that, you could email over a list of bug #s with comments, to
kill more than one bird with a single stone. ;)

--
William L. Thomson Jr.
Gentoo/Java



------=_Part_89839_2551301.1168992454675-- -- gentoo-java@gentoo.org mailing list