Hello again. On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 07:02:01AM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote: > Yeah. Sigh. Instead of jumping to negative conclusions and getting angry, > how about just asking the question if you are unsure.
I did ask questions. I also gave you context so you'd easier know what information I needed. > > In this case "take care of" probably means file a removal bug for the rdepend > and then remove the moreinfo tag once that's been processed. > > We get stacks of removal bugs and there's no way the FTP team can keep mental > track of the state of all of them. The moreinfo tag is our tool to know when > it's time to review a bug again. Are you sure you want me to spam you with even more (autogenerated!) removal bugs then? Why not track the same issue in the same bug report and just implement an automatic recursive function for your removal tools?! (Or handle it manually if you prefer, but refer to the same bug report to get full context in case anyone wants to keep track of what happened in the future.) It seems very counter-productive to increase your load by implementing a spam-tools on my side to hand you even more removal requests, rather then handling it on the receiving end... > > No bullying, just asking for a little help moving along the removal you asked > for. I've spent quite a lot of time on making sure both removal bugs I asked for yesterday are actually ready to happen *now*. Thats why they where filed. (eg. both #797429 and #797441 ) Please reconfirm you want to be spammed with a separate bug report per recusive reverse dependency removal. Regards, Andreas Henriksson
