Bug#383403: Processed: info that it has *not* been dealt with

2008-05-17 Thread Robert Millan
On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 11:33:03AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > 
> > But the maintainer does, and for a change this request doesn't conflict with
> > the Social Contract.  Why are we discussing on whether we prefer one bug or
> > multiple bugs when we have actual SC violations right now that need fixing?
> 
> What does it gain to close the bug that contains the history of the
> problem ? 

My guess is that this makes it easier to track the problems, by closing stuff
in changelog when a partial fix is done.

-- 
Robert Millan

 I know my rights; I want my phone call!
 What use is a phone call… if you are unable to speak?
(as seen on /.)



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Bug#383403: Processed: info that it has *not* been dealt with

2008-05-17 Thread Sven Luther
On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 11:21:18AM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
> On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 09:13:34AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 12:30:58AM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
> > > On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 12:03:39AM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
> > > > On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 08:31:40PM +0300, Markus Laire wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > I'm not a maintainer, but I did have info that bug had not been
> > > > > dealt with, so I reopened the bug with that info.
> > > > 
> > > > I see that you sent info, but only to the BTS control bot, which 
> > > > prevents it
> > > > from being reflected in the bug log.
> > > > 
> > > > I suggest you re-send it.
> > > 
> > > Btw, as for this BTS ping-pong game, Max asked that you file separate bugs
> > > instead of reopening this one.  This doesn't sound like an unreasonable
> > > request, so why not just do that?
> > 
> > Robert, i don't really see the reason why this should be done.
> 
> But the maintainer does, and for a change this request doesn't conflict with
> the Social Contract.  Why are we discussing on whether we prefer one bug or
> multiple bugs when we have actual SC violations right now that need fixing?

What does it gain to close the bug that contains the history of the
problem ? 

> > > It's probably helpful to the maintainers to have a separate bug for each
> > > violation.  I can imagine that working with one [1] huge report while 
> > > trying
> > > to actually fix stuff can be a PITA.
> > 
> > Well, i suppose that callign the reporter stupid, as max did is not
> > helpful also. Nor threatenenign me to be blacklisted from the BTS. Max
> > should really calm down, i know he is not agreeing with the firmware
> > split, but this doesn't allow him to be impolite and threatening.
> 
> IIRC he was threatening Markus, not you. 

15:22:53 < maks> svenl: don't fuck with the bts or get your email blacklisted 
kthx

> Anyway, I suppose by now he realises
> that was completely inappropiate, and actually counterproductive.

Nice of you to have such good faith in the socialness of the members of
the kernel team. I have learned not to have such faith myself though.

> Now can we please get this over with?

fine with me, but then, as always, the other side will never forget, and
issues will not improve until they recognize that their behaviour is not
appropriate, which i have some serious doubt they have the strength of
character to do.

Sadly,

Sven Luther



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Bug#383403: Processed: info that it has *not* been dealt with

2008-05-16 Thread Robert Millan
On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 12:03:39AM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
> On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 08:31:40PM +0300, Markus Laire wrote:
> > 
> > I'm not a maintainer, but I did have info that bug had not been
> > dealt with, so I reopened the bug with that info.
> 
> I see that you sent info, but only to the BTS control bot, which prevents it
> from being reflected in the bug log.
> 
> I suggest you re-send it.

Btw, as for this BTS ping-pong game, Max asked that you file separate bugs
instead of reopening this one.  This doesn't sound like an unreasonable
request, so why not just do that?

It's probably helpful to the maintainers to have a separate bug for each
violation.  I can imagine that working with one [1] huge report while trying
to actually fix stuff can be a PITA.

[1] well, actually a few merged reports, but it amounts to the same.

-- 
Robert Millan

 I know my rights; I want my phone call!
 What use is a phone call… if you are unable to speak?
(as seen on /.)



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]