On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 10:47 AM, Vincent Hennebert <vhenneb...@gmail.com>wrote:

> On 12/07/12 16:17, Glenn Adams wrote:
> > If there is no bug entry in bugzilla, then there is/was no bug. Since
> this
> > is clearly a bug fix, there should be a documentation trail through the
> bug
> > database. So please create an entry and do so in the future. The
> status.xml
> > document is only an informal paraphrase of bug database entries, and
> should
> > not be considered the authoritative list of bugs.
> Well it /is/ authoritative, in the sense that its content is used to
> display the list of changes on the website:
> http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/fop/changes.html

The fact that status.xml makes reference to bugzilla entries, and not the
other way around shows the latter is more authoritative than the former.

> As long as it’s the case, duplicating entries in Bugzilla is just
> a waste of time.

Not it isn't. It is good time spent to document the work on FOP/XGC, etc.
Others are doing this, so you should follow suit and not be remiss in your

> Once that status.xml has been deprecated and an other mechanism
> implemented to extract the list of changes from Bugzilla and display
> them on the website, I’ll certainly start creating entries in Bugzilla.
> In the meantime, I don’t see the point of doing both.
> Unless, again, I’m missing something.

It's a matter of following best current practice. Failing to record in BZ
is not following BCP.

Reply via email to