On Thursday 24 April 2008, Jeroen Roovers wrote: > One other thing is that it is sometimes difficult to figure out to > whom a bug should be assigned, because metadata.xml for many packages > simply isn't clear. If you list a few developers as well as a herd, > does that mean you want bugs assigned to the herd or to a single > developer who happens to be in that list? Some packages list several > herds in metadata.xml.
unfortunately this is dependent on the herd/developers. debating which is correct is pointless. let's add a priority or some other marker to the dtd so people updating the xml can indicate the preference themselves. > Bugs can be assigned to just one address > (or you get "Assignee: [EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED] did not > match anything"). that's why the CC list exists > [2] has nothing explicit to say on this subject, sadly. It seems some > editors of metadata.xml use the file as a sort of CREDITS or AUTHORS. > While that may seem OK, the file is intended to give information about > ebuilds. ChangeLog is intended to credit authors (specifically > mentioning ebuild authors and contributors[3]). agreed. metadata.xml is certainly not the place for giving credit. use the ChangeLog file. -mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
