[gentoo-java] Bugs submission

[gentoo-java] Bugs submission

[Miroslav Šulc]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 122 bytes --]

Hi,

where should we submit bugs related to migration overlay? Should we use
bugs.gentoo.org?

-- 
Miroslav Šulc


[-- Attachment #2: miroslav.sulc.vcf --]
[-- Type: text/x-vcard, Size: 349 bytes --]

begin:vcard
fn;quoted-printable:Miroslav =C5=A0ulc
n;quoted-printable:=C5=A0ulc;Miroslav
org:StartNet s.r.o.
adr;quoted-printable;quoted-printable:;;Schodov=C3=A1 309/10;Praha 5;;150 00;=C4=8Cesk=C3=A1 republika
email;internet:miroslav.sulc@startnet.cz
tel;cell:+420 603 711 413
x-mozilla-html:TRUE
url:http://www.startnet.cz
version:2.1
end:vcard

[gentoo-java] Re: Bugs submission

[Wiktor Wandachowicz]

Miroslav Šulc <miroslav.sulc@...> writes:

> 
> Hi,
> 
> where should we submit bugs related to migration overlay? Should we use
> bugs.gentoo.org?
> 

I'm afraid that the b.g.o maintainers wouldn't like it much...
Maybe there should be some thread / page in the javaexperimental trac?
(and I don't think that posting it here is best, I was corrected once)

But on the other hand, some METABUG in b.g.o shouldn't be a problem,
like the jdk-1.5 METABUG maybe? And the maintainers should know about it
beforehand, so they wouldn't dismiss such reports as INVALID or WONTFIX.


-- 
gentoo-java@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-java] Re: Bugs submission

[Joshua Nichols]

Wiktor Wandachowicz wrote:
> Miroslav Šulc <miroslav.sulc@...> writes:
>
>   
>> Hi,
>>
>> where should we submit bugs related to migration overlay? Should we use
>> bugs.gentoo.org?
>>
>>     
>
> I'm afraid that the b.g.o maintainers wouldn't like it much...
> Maybe there should be some thread / page in the javaexperimental trac?
> (and I don't think that posting it here is best, I was corrected once)
>
> But on the other hand, some METABUG in b.g.o shouldn't be a problem,
> like the jdk-1.5 METABUG maybe? And the maintainers should know about it
> beforehand, so they wouldn't dismiss such reports as INVALID or WONTFIX.
>
>
>   
I actually don't think using bugs.gentoo.org would be too bad. Although, 
it would be preferred if bugs directly to java@gentoo.org, so we don't 
drive bug-wranglers crazy. To this end, I made a 'bookmarkable template' 
and setup a tinyurl for it:

*http://tinyurl.com/ofzha*

Please use this for reporting migration-related bugs. It should be 
preset to be assigned to java@gentoo.org, block the migration bug, and 
will have [migration-overlay] in the title.

Regards,
Josh
-- 
gentoo-java@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-java] Re: Bugs submission

[Vincent Schut]

On Wed, 29 Mar 2006 01:02:48 +0200, Joshua Nichols  
<nichoj-aBrp7R+bbdUdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org> wrote:

> Wiktor Wandachowicz wrote:
>> Miroslav Šulc <miroslav.sulc@...> writes:
>>
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> where should we submit bugs related to migration overlay? Should we use
>>> bugs.gentoo.org?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I'm afraid that the b.g.o maintainers wouldn't like it much...
>> Maybe there should be some thread / page in the javaexperimental trac?
>> (and I don't think that posting it here is best, I was corrected once)
>>
>> But on the other hand, some METABUG in b.g.o shouldn't be a problem,
>> like the jdk-1.5 METABUG maybe? And the maintainers should know about it
>> beforehand, so they wouldn't dismiss such reports as INVALID or WONTFIX.
>>
>>
>>
> I actually don't think using bugs.gentoo.org would be too bad. Although,  
> it would be preferred if bugs directly to  
> java-aBrp7R+bbdUdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, so we don't drive  
> bug-wranglers crazy. To this end, I made a 'bookmarkable template' and  
> setup a tinyurl for it:
>
> *http://tinyurl.com/ofzha*
>
> Please use this for reporting migration-related bugs. It should be  
> preset to be assigned to java-aBrp7R+bbdUdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org,  
> block the migration bug, and will have [migration-overlay] in the title.

I tried using the tinyurl link to file a bug about tomcat (bug nr.  
127949), but I think it still went to the normal bug-wranglers. See the  
following reply
I got:

Display all headersSubject: [Bug 127949] [migration-overlay] tomcat-5.5.16  
works for amd64
To: schut@sarvision.nl
From: bugzilla-daemon@gentoo.org
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 09:05:09 +0000

--------- start forward ---------
Clear-Text: http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=127949
Secure: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=127949


jakub@gentoo.org changed:

            What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  CC|                            |java@gentoo.org
              Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
          Resolution|                            |UPSTREAM




------- Comment #1 from jakub@gentoo.org  2006-03-29 01:05 PST -------
Hmmmm, better ask the people who run the overlay...


--
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.gentoo.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You reported the bug, or are watching the reporter.
--------- end forward ---------

Cheers,
Vincent.

>
> Regards,
> Josh



-- 
gentoo-java@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-java] Re: Bugs submission

[Joshua Nichols]

Vincent Schut wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Mar 2006 01:02:48 +0200, Joshua Nichols 
> <nichoj-aBrp7R+bbdUdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
>> Wiktor Wandachowicz wrote:
>>> Miroslav Šulc <miroslav.sulc@...> writes:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> where should we submit bugs related to migration overlay? Should we 
>>>> use
>>>> bugs.gentoo.org?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> I'm afraid that the b.g.o maintainers wouldn't like it much...
>>> Maybe there should be some thread / page in the javaexperimental trac?
>>> (and I don't think that posting it here is best, I was corrected once)
>>>
>>> But on the other hand, some METABUG in b.g.o shouldn't be a problem,
>>> like the jdk-1.5 METABUG maybe? And the maintainers should know 
>>> about it
>>> beforehand, so they wouldn't dismiss such reports as INVALID or 
>>> WONTFIX.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> I actually don't think using bugs.gentoo.org would be too bad. 
>> Although, it would be preferred if bugs directly to 
>> java-aBrp7R+bbdUdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, so we don't drive 
>> bug-wranglers crazy. To this end, I made a 'bookmarkable template' 
>> and setup a tinyurl for it:
>>
>> *http://tinyurl.com/ofzha*
>>
>> Please use this for reporting migration-related bugs. It should be 
>> preset to be assigned to 
>> java-aBrp7R+bbdUdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, block the migration 
>> bug, and will have [migration-overlay] in the title.
>
> I tried using the tinyurl link to file a bug about tomcat (bug nr. 
> 127949), but I think it still went to the normal bug-wranglers. See 
> the following reply
> I got:
>
> Display all headersSubject: [Bug 127949] [migration-overlay] 
> tomcat-5.5.16 works for amd64
> To: schut@sarvision.nl
> From: bugzilla-daemon@gentoo.org
> Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 09:05:09 +0000
>
> --------- start forward ---------
> Clear-Text: http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=127949
> Secure: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=127949
>
>
> jakub@gentoo.org changed:
>
>            What    |Removed                     |Added
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
>
>                  CC|                            |java@gentoo.org
>              Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
>          Resolution|                            |UPSTREAM
>
>
>
>
> ------- Comment #1 from jakub@gentoo.org  2006-03-29 01:05 PST -------
> Hmmmm, better ask the people who run the overlay...
>
>
> --Configure bugmail: http://bugs.gentoo.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
> ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
> You reported the bug, or are watching the reporter.
> --------- end forward ---------

Well, first, the bug you filed really doesn't have anything to do with 
the migration overlay (because it's from the experimental overlay). That 
being said, I was working on keywording it around the time you filed it, 
and should be fixed.

As for why it got assigned to bug-wranglers... I think there's an issue 
with bugzilla where you can't switch between simple and expert modes for 
filing bug. I suspect that this happened with the upgrade a bit back, 
and you're stuck with whatever mode you were using at that time. The 
feature for assigning directly to someone (ie java@gentoo.org) is one of 
the features from expert, so this would explain why it didn't take effect.

So, I'll try to have a word with the bug wranglers to make sure these 
don't get resolved this way.

- Josh
-- 
gentoo-java@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-java] Re: Bugs submission

[Vincent Schut]

On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 18:30:55 +0200, Joshua Nichols <nichoj@gentoo.org>  
wrote:

> Vincent Schut wrote:
>> On Wed, 29 Mar 2006 01:02:48 +0200, Joshua Nichols  
>> <nichoj-aBrp7R+bbdUdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Wiktor Wandachowicz wrote:
>>>> Miroslav Šulc <miroslav.sulc@...> writes:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> where should we submit bugs related to migration overlay? Should we  
>>>>> use
>>>>> bugs.gentoo.org?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'm afraid that the b.g.o maintainers wouldn't like it much...
>>>> Maybe there should be some thread / page in the javaexperimental trac?
>>>> (and I don't think that posting it here is best, I was corrected once)
>>>>
>>>> But on the other hand, some METABUG in b.g.o shouldn't be a problem,
>>>> like the jdk-1.5 METABUG maybe? And the maintainers should know about  
>>>> it
>>>> beforehand, so they wouldn't dismiss such reports as INVALID or  
>>>> WONTFIX.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> I actually don't think using bugs.gentoo.org would be too bad.  
>>> Although, it would be preferred if bugs directly to  
>>> java-aBrp7R+bbdUdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, so we don't drive  
>>> bug-wranglers crazy. To this end, I made a 'bookmarkable template' and  
>>> setup a tinyurl for it:
>>>
>>> *http://tinyurl.com/ofzha*
>>>
>>> Please use this for reporting migration-related bugs. It should be  
>>> preset to be assigned to java-aBrp7R+bbdUdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org,  
>>> block the migration bug, and will have [migration-overlay] in the  
>>> title.
>>
>> I tried using the tinyurl link to file a bug about tomcat (bug nr.  
>> 127949), but I think it still went to the normal bug-wranglers. See the  
>> following reply
>> I got:
>>
>> Display all headersSubject: [Bug 127949] [migration-overlay]  
>> tomcat-5.5.16 works for amd64
>> To: schut@sarvision.nl
>> From: bugzilla-daemon@gentoo.org
>> Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 09:05:09 +0000
>>
>> --------- start forward ---------
>> Clear-Text: http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=127949
>> Secure: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=127949
>>
>>
>> jakub@gentoo.org changed:
>>
>>            What    |Removed                     |Added
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------  
>>                  CC|                            |java@gentoo.org
>>              Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
>>          Resolution|                            |UPSTREAM
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------- Comment #1 from jakub@gentoo.org  2006-03-29 01:05 PST -------
>> Hmmmm, better ask the people who run the overlay...
>>
>>
>> --Configure bugmail: http://bugs.gentoo.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
>> ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
>> You reported the bug, or are watching the reporter.
>> --------- end forward ---------
>
> Well, first, the bug you filed really doesn't have anything to do with  
> the migration overlay (because it's from the experimental overlay). That  
> being said, I was working on keywording it around the time you filed it,  
> and should be fixed.

Ah, sorry. I assumed they belonged together.
Could someone please tell me then how/where to file bugs regarding the  
experimental overlay?

Vincent.
>
> As for why it got assigned to bug-wranglers... I think there's an issue  
> with bugzilla where you can't switch between simple and expert modes for  
> filing bug. I suspect that this happened with the upgrade a bit back,  
> and you're stuck with whatever mode you were using at that time. The  
> feature for assigning directly to someone (ie java@gentoo.org) is one of  
> the features from expert, so this would explain why it didn't take  
> effect.
>
> So, I'll try to have a word with the bug wranglers to make sure these  
> don't get resolved this way.
>
> - Josh


-- 
gentoo-java@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-java] Re: Bugs submission

[Joshua Nichols]

Vincent Schut wrote:
> On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 18:30:55 +0200, Joshua Nichols <nichoj@gentoo.org>
> wrote:
>
>> Vincent Schut wrote:
>>> On Wed, 29 Mar 2006 01:02:48 +0200, Joshua Nichols
>>> <nichoj-aBrp7R+bbdUdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Wiktor Wandachowicz wrote:
>>>>> Miroslav Šulc <miroslav.sulc@...> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> where should we submit bugs related to migration overlay? Should
>>>>>> we use
>>>>>> bugs.gentoo.org?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm afraid that the b.g.o maintainers wouldn't like it much...
>>>>> Maybe there should be some thread / page in the javaexperimental
>>>>> trac?
>>>>> (and I don't think that posting it here is best, I was corrected
>>>>> once)
>>>>>
>>>>> But on the other hand, some METABUG in b.g.o shouldn't be a problem,
>>>>> like the jdk-1.5 METABUG maybe? And the maintainers should know
>>>>> about it
>>>>> beforehand, so they wouldn't dismiss such reports as INVALID or
>>>>> WONTFIX.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> I actually don't think using bugs.gentoo.org would be too bad.
>>>> Although, it would be preferred if bugs directly to
>>>> java-aBrp7R+bbdUdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, so we don't drive
>>>> bug-wranglers crazy. To this end, I made a 'bookmarkable template'
>>>> and setup a tinyurl for it:
>>>>
>>>> *http://tinyurl.com/ofzha*
>>>>
>>>> Please use this for reporting migration-related bugs. It should be
>>>> preset to be assigned to
>>>> java-aBrp7R+bbdUdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, block the migration
>>>> bug, and will have [migration-overlay] in the title.
>>>
>>> I tried using the tinyurl link to file a bug about tomcat (bug nr.
>>> 127949), but I think it still went to the normal bug-wranglers. See
>>> the following reply
>>> I got:
>>>
>>> Display all headersSubject: [Bug 127949] [migration-overlay]
>>> tomcat-5.5.16 works for amd64
>>> To: schut@sarvision.nl
>>> From: bugzilla-daemon@gentoo.org
>>> Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 09:05:09 +0000
>>>
>>> --------- start forward ---------
>>> Clear-Text: http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=127949
>>> Secure: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=127949
>>>
>>>
>>> jakub@gentoo.org changed:
>>>
>>>            What    |Removed                     |Added
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>                  CC|                            |java@gentoo.org
>>>              Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
>>>          Resolution|                            |UPSTREAM
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------- Comment #1 from jakub@gentoo.org  2006-03-29 01:05 PST -------
>>> Hmmmm, better ask the people who run the overlay...
>>>
>>>
>>> --Configure bugmail: http://bugs.gentoo.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
>>> ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
>>> You reported the bug, or are watching the reporter.
>>> --------- end forward ---------
>>
>> Well, first, the bug you filed really doesn't have anything to do
>> with the migration overlay (because it's from the experimental
>> overlay). That being said, I was working on keywording it around the
>> time you filed it, and should be fixed.
>
> Ah, sorry. I assumed they belonged together.
> Could someone please tell me then how/where to file bugs regarding the
> experimental overlay?

I suppose we could use the same strategy as migration-overlay, ie put
[java-experimental] in the summary, and assign the bug directly to
java@gentoo.org.


>
> Vincent.
>>
>> As for why it got assigned to bug-wranglers... I think there's an
>> issue with bugzilla where you can't switch between simple and expert
>> modes for filing bug. I suspect that this happened with the upgrade a
>> bit back, and you're stuck with whatever mode you were using at that
>> time. The feature for assigning directly to someone (ie
>> java@gentoo.org) is one of the features from expert, so this would
>> explain why it didn't take effect.
>>
>> So, I'll try to have a word with the bug wranglers to make sure these
>> don't get resolved this way.
>>
>> - Josh
-- 
gentoo-java@gentoo.org mailing list