Re: [gentoo-java] Re: Bugs submission

["Vincent Schut" <schut@sarvision.nl>]

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