* [gentoo-java] Re: Bugs submission
@ 2006-04-03 7:41 Vincent Schut
2006-04-03 16:30 ` Joshua Nichols
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Vincent Schut @ 2006-04-03 7:41 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-java
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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [gentoo-java] Re: Bugs submission
2006-04-03 7:41 [gentoo-java] Re: Bugs submission Vincent Schut
@ 2006-04-03 16:30 ` Joshua Nichols
2006-04-04 11:29 ` Vincent Schut
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Joshua Nichols @ 2006-04-03 16:30 UTC (permalink / raw
To: Vincent Schut; +Cc: gentoo-java
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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-java] Re: Bugs submission
2006-04-03 16:30 ` Joshua Nichols
@ 2006-04-04 11:29 ` Vincent Schut
2006-04-12 22:46 ` Joshua Nichols
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Vincent Schut @ 2006-04-04 11:29 UTC (permalink / raw
To: Joshua Nichols; +Cc: gentoo-java
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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-java] Re: Bugs submission
2006-04-04 11:29 ` Vincent Schut
@ 2006-04-12 22:46 ` Joshua Nichols
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Joshua Nichols @ 2006-04-12 22:46 UTC (permalink / raw
To: Vincent Schut; +Cc: gentoo-java
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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [gentoo-java] Bugs submission
@ 2006-03-28 11:06 Miroslav Šulc
2006-03-28 22:54 ` [gentoo-java] " Wiktor Wandachowicz
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Miroslav Šulc @ 2006-03-28 11:06 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-java
[-- 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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [gentoo-java] Re: Bugs submission
2006-03-28 11:06 [gentoo-java] " Miroslav Šulc
@ 2006-03-28 22:54 ` Wiktor Wandachowicz
2006-03-28 23:02 ` Joshua Nichols
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Wiktor Wandachowicz @ 2006-03-28 22:54 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-java
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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-java] Re: Bugs submission
2006-03-28 22:54 ` [gentoo-java] " Wiktor Wandachowicz
@ 2006-03-28 23:02 ` Joshua Nichols
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Joshua Nichols @ 2006-03-28 23:02 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-java
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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2006-04-12 22:46 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2006-04-03 7:41 [gentoo-java] Re: Bugs submission Vincent Schut
2006-04-03 16:30 ` Joshua Nichols
2006-04-04 11:29 ` Vincent Schut
2006-04-12 22:46 ` Joshua Nichols
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-03-28 11:06 [gentoo-java] " Miroslav Šulc
2006-03-28 22:54 ` [gentoo-java] " Wiktor Wandachowicz
2006-03-28 23:02 ` Joshua Nichols
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox