[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Tracking package submissions with Debbugs
From: |
ng0 |
Subject: |
Re: Tracking package submissions with Debbugs |
Date: |
Sun, 04 Sep 2016 17:00:57 +0000 |
Resend because somehow this ended up being send from my unsubscribed
address:
ng0 <address@hidden> writes:
> Andreas Enge <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> using debbugs corresponds to a suggestion I made a while ago, so I am
>> obviously in favour of it...
>>
>> On Sun, Sep 04, 2016 at 10:37:02AM +0800, Alex Vong wrote:
>>> > I think it would make sense to have the one bug report for the "target
>>> > package" and then all the packages that get pulled in along the way get
>>> > tacked on also.
>>> Hmm, but what if we have 2 target packages (A, B) pulling the same
>>> package (C) in? Then it is not obvious if C should live in A's or B's
>>> bug report. What do you think?
>>
>> I do not quite understand the problem with relating bug reports to packages.
>> The discussion sounds as if we considered one constantly open bug report per
>> package, which is maybe a misunderstanding on my part. I would say that bug
>> reports should correspond roughly to our current discussion threads on
>> guix-devel: Someone sends in a patch or patch series, which opens a new bug
>> (there seems to be the problem of git-sendmail still); there are replies back
>> and forth; in the end the patch is applied (or, from time to time,
>> retracted),
>> and the bug is closed. In this way, we have an overview of pending patches
>> and are less likely to forget one.
>>
>> As for the non-emacs users, I intend to work as before: Subscribe to all the
>> bugs and have them end up in my mailbox, reply, and potentially close them
>> by mail.
>>
>> Andreas
>>
>
> A constant open bug could be confusing and misleading. Is this really
> what they mean? My preference would be:
>
> User sends email with patch (or coverletter, wait for assignment*),
> patch gets assigned id, all correspondence regarding that bug is done in
> that thread, bug is considered/marked as done when the patch is merged.
>
>
> * which can be contra-productive as debbugs email to arrive at my side
> sometimes take 12 - 24 hours
> --
> ng0
> For non-prism friendly talk find me on http://www.psyced.org
>
--
ng0
For non-prism friendly talk find me on http://www.psyced.org
- Re: Feedback, ideas, discussion: tracking patches, discussions, bugs., (continued)
- Re: Feedback, ideas, discussion: tracking patches, discussions, bugs., Efraim Flashner, 2016/09/03
- Tracking package submissions with Debbugs, Ludovic Courtès, 2016/09/02
- Re: Tracking package submissions with Debbugs, Ricardo Wurmus, 2016/09/02
- Re: Tracking package submissions with Debbugs, Alex Vong, 2016/09/02
- Re: Tracking package submissions with Debbugs, Ludovic Courtès, 2016/09/03
- Re: Tracking package submissions with Debbugs, Alex Vong, 2016/09/03
- Re: Tracking package submissions with Debbugs, Efraim Flashner, 2016/09/03
- Re: Tracking package submissions with Debbugs, Alex Vong, 2016/09/03
- Re: Tracking package submissions with Debbugs, Andreas Enge, 2016/09/04
- Re: Tracking package submissions with Debbugs, ng0, 2016/09/04
- Re: Tracking package submissions with Debbugs,
ng0 <=
- Re: Tracking package submissions with Debbugs, David Craven, 2016/09/04
- Re: Tracking package submissions with Debbugs, Alex Kost, 2016/09/05
- Re: Tracking package submissions with Debbugs, Ludovic Courtès, 2016/09/05
- Re: Tracking package submissions with Debbugs, David Craven, 2016/09/05
- Re: Tracking package submissions with Debbugs, ng0, 2016/09/05
- Re: Tracking package submissions with Debbugs, Ludovic Courtès, 2016/09/07
- Re: Tracking package submissions with Debbugs, ng0, 2016/09/05
- Re: Tracking package submissions with Debbugs, David Craven, 2016/09/05
- Re: Tracking package submissions with Debbugs, Ben Woodcroft, 2016/09/05
- Re: Tracking package submissions with Debbugs, ng0, 2016/09/06