On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 7:41 PM, Bernd Steinhauser<[email protected]> wrote: > Bryan Østergaard wrote: >> >> Personally I'd hate assigned-to.This is completely unrelated to masks >> as such but I want to avoid any kind of ownership when possible. >> Ownership pretty much screams "that guy is responsible so I shouldn't >> / don't have to fix it" and I'd much rather just see everything as one >> big pool of things to do with anybody being able to fix anything >> (doesn't matter if it's an official Exherbo dev or somebody we've >> never heard of before really). > > Hm, maybe I have been misunderstood here. > I didn't see the assigned-to in a way that when somebody masks a package > (maybe for security issues) he sets someone else to be responsible for it. > > I rather meant it as a statement that when someone tries to solve the issue, > sets that as a note, so people know who they should contact in case they > have to add something. > > For unwritten, we do that by modifying the comments. > Obviously, that could be another way, maybe a better way, I'm not sure about > it. > > Anyway, I didn't mean the assign-to to be something that introduces some > kind of »mask-wrangling«. > Maybe summary and description can fulfill that purpose? 'assigned-to' sounds very much like ownership to me and 'comment' or similar would overlap quite a bit with 'summary' and 'description'.
If we decide to go with an extra field I'd prefer something like 'contact' instead of 'assigned-to'. The idea being that $somebody might very well have important information or ideas related to mask but that shouldn't stop anybody else from taking a stab at it. Regards, Bryan Østergaard _______________________________________________ Exherbo-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.exherbo.org/mailman/listinfo/exherbo-dev
