В Вск, 04/01/2009 в 18:57 +0100, Robert Buchholz пишет:
> On Sunday 04 January 2009, Mike Auty wrote:
> > Jeroen Roovers wrote:
> > > The order ("first maintainer as assignee" or "first maintainer/herd
> > > as assignee") is open to discussion and I think this is the proper
> > > forum to have that discussion.
> I actually implemented it this way before (only that I had all herds 
> with higher priority than all maintainers, which is the reverse of your 
> patch).
> Accepting the fact that different teams have different preferences, we 
> need to find a solution for them to set theirs individually. This could 
> either be the order of elements in metadata.xml (and would set the 
> preference on a per-package basis) or some attribute in herds.xml 
> (which would be a global setting per herd, and we'd need to find a 
> default).

It looks like we really need some per-team configuration for default
assignment. Probably it's good idea to add 'weight' (or 'nice')
attribute for <herd> and <maintainer> elements both in herds.xml and
metadata.xml. Bug assignment field will be selected from the elements
with minimal weight (least nice ;)). IMO best is to assign on first
(any) maintainer in this list and on first (any) herd if there is no
maintainer elements there. If weight is defined in multiple places, per
category weight overrides weight from herd.xml and weight in
metadata.xml overrides everything. This allows easy way to define any
policy team wants but still allow maintainer to override team
preference. What do you think?


Reply via email to