Re: Processed: info that it has *not* been dealt with

2008-05-17 Thread Robert Millan
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?

  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.  Anyway, I suppose by now he realises
that was completely inappropiate, and actually counterproductive.  Now can we
please get this over with?

-- 
Robert Millan

GPLv2 I know my rights; I want my phone call!
DRM 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]



Re: 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

GPLv2 I know my rights; I want my phone call!
DRM 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]



Re: Processed: info that it has *not* been dealt with

2008-05-16 Thread Steve Langasek
On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 06:55:56PM +0200, maximilian attems wrote:
 stop this game or i get you blacklisted on debian bug tracking system.

 it is up to the maintainer to decide if that is closed or not.

The maintainer is the Debian kernel team, not you personally.

I object to you attempting to close bugs in contradiction of fact.

-- 
Steve Langasek   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer   to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]


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



Re: 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

GPLv2 I know my rights; I want my phone call!
DRM 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]