On 11 Aug 2006 00:00:00 +0000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christian 'Opfer' Faulhammer) wrote:
> Tach Jeroen, 0x2B859DE3 (PGP-PK-ID) > > Jeroen Roovers schrieb: > > One solution might be to open your own AT bug, make the stabilisation > > bug depend on it, and use the AT bug to have ATs post their `emerge > > info`. Then, when testing and stabilisation is finished for your arch, > > close the AT bug and remove your alias from the stabilisation bug's CC > > list. I for one could live with this solution to the problem, which I > > hope you understand by now. > > This sounds quite interesting...maybe some arch devs should comment on > that. The only problem I see is when two ATs test at the same time and > open two separate bugs for the same arch. And another problem: Other > arches don't see the problems in the depending bug and are unlikely to > comment on it. Besides the points you mentioned, it would create a lot of bug spam. There would be the "a new bug depends on this bug" e-mail when the AT files the bug, then there would be the "a bug that depends on this bug has changed state" e-mail when the arch dev closes the AT's bug, and then there would be the e-mail from the arch dev when he/she comments on the original bug saying "arch-xyz stable" -Thomas
pgpsF5RKCaBpJ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
