Re: #wg-stable: Reservations about a "STABLE" & "NeedsStable" bugzilla keywords (re: [gentoo-dev] New Working Group established to evaluate the stable tree)

2016-10-06 Thread Daniel Campbell
On 10/04/2016 10:25 AM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote: > On 20/08/16 08:30 PM, Daniel Campbell wrote: >> On 08/15/2016 12:42 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: >>> On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 3:30 PM, Andreas K. Hüttel >>> wrote: 1) Stabilization is a simpler and much more formalized

Re: #wg-stable: Reservations about a "STABLE" & "NeedsStable" bugzilla keywords (re: [gentoo-dev] New Working Group established to evaluate the stable tree)

2016-10-04 Thread Ian Stakenvicius
On 20/08/16 08:30 PM, Daniel Campbell wrote: > On 08/15/2016 12:42 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: >> On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 3:30 PM, Andreas K. Hüttel >> wrote: >>> 1) Stabilization is a simpler and much more formalized process compared to >>> normal bug resolution. >>> * There

Re: #wg-stable: Reservations about a "STABLE" & "NeedsStable" bugzilla keywords (re: [gentoo-dev] New Working Group established to evaluate the stable tree)

2016-08-20 Thread Daniel Campbell
On 08/15/2016 12:42 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 3:30 PM, Andreas K. Hüttel > wrote: >> 1) Stabilization is a simpler and much more formalized process compared to >> normal bug resolution. >> * There is one version to be stabilized. >> * One precise

Re: #wg-stable: Reservations about a "STABLE" & "NeedsStable" bugzilla keywords (re: [gentoo-dev] New Working Group established to evaluate the stable tree)

2016-08-15 Thread Kent Fredric
On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 21:30:04 +0200 "Andreas K. Hüttel" wrote: > 2) *If* we introduce a "Fixed-in" and maybe an "Introduced-in" field in > Bugzilla, which gives a precise $CATEGORY/$PVR where a problem is resolved or > introduced, the extraction of fixed or non-fixed bugs

Re: #wg-stable: Reservations about a "STABLE" & "NeedsStable" bugzilla keywords (re: [gentoo-dev] New Working Group established to evaluate the stable tree)

2016-08-15 Thread Kent Fredric
On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 15:03:08 +0200 Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: > Could you please elaborate a bit? In particular from perspective of (i) > integration into current workflow, (ii) complexity in application > maintenance/hosting (iii) cost/benefit considerations Biggest

Re: #wg-stable: Reservations about a "STABLE" & "NeedsStable" bugzilla keywords (re: [gentoo-dev] New Working Group established to evaluate the stable tree)

2016-08-15 Thread Rich Freeman
On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 3:30 PM, Andreas K. Hüttel wrote: > 1) Stabilization is a simpler and much more formalized process compared to > normal bug resolution. > * There is one version to be stabilized. > * One precise package version Can you clarify what this means? Do

Re: #wg-stable: Reservations about a "STABLE" & "NeedsStable" bugzilla keywords (re: [gentoo-dev] New Working Group established to evaluate the stable tree)

2016-08-15 Thread Andreas K. Hüttel
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Am Montag, 15. August 2016, 15:03:08 schrieb Kristian Fiskerstrand: > On 08/15/2016 02:49 PM, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 6:29 AM, Kent Fredric wrote: > >> This sort of stuff makes me feel bugzilla is

Re: #wg-stable: Reservations about a "STABLE" & "NeedsStable" bugzilla keywords (re: [gentoo-dev] New Working Group established to evaluate the stable tree)

2016-08-15 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 3:25 PM, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: >> very different process from handling bugs and feature requests. It >> would be great if we had tooling that focuses on these instead of >> trying to fit into the bug tracker. It would entail a different > > I'm not

Re: #wg-stable: Reservations about a "STABLE" & "NeedsStable" bugzilla keywords (re: [gentoo-dev] New Working Group established to evaluate the stable tree)

2016-08-15 Thread james
On 08/15/2016 09:25 AM, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: On 08/15/2016 03:15 PM, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote: On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 3:03 PM, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: Could you please elaborate a bit? In particular from perspective of (i) integration into current workflow, (ii)

Re: #wg-stable: Reservations about a "STABLE" & "NeedsStable" bugzilla keywords (re: [gentoo-dev] New Working Group established to evaluate the stable tree)

2016-08-15 Thread Kristian Fiskerstrand
On 08/15/2016 03:15 PM, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote: > On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 3:03 PM, Kristian Fiskerstrand > wrote: >> Could you please elaborate a bit? In particular from perspective of (i) >> integration into current workflow, (ii) complexity in application >> maintenance/hosting

Re: #wg-stable: Reservations about a "STABLE" & "NeedsStable" bugzilla keywords (re: [gentoo-dev] New Working Group established to evaluate the stable tree)

2016-08-15 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 3:03 PM, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: > Could you please elaborate a bit? In particular from perspective of (i) > integration into current workflow, (ii) complexity in application > maintenance/hosting (iii) cost/benefit considerations Well, I think

Re: #wg-stable: Reservations about a "STABLE" & "NeedsStable" bugzilla keywords (re: [gentoo-dev] New Working Group established to evaluate the stable tree)

2016-08-15 Thread Kristian Fiskerstrand
On 08/15/2016 02:49 PM, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote: > On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 6:29 AM, Kent Fredric wrote: >> This sort of stuff makes me feel bugzilla is entirely the wrong platform for >> handling stabilizations and keywords :/ > > I very much agree; some kind of minimal web

Re: #wg-stable: Reservations about a "STABLE" & "NeedsStable" bugzilla keywords (re: [gentoo-dev] New Working Group established to evaluate the stable tree)

2016-08-15 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 6:29 AM, Kent Fredric wrote: > This sort of stuff makes me feel bugzilla is entirely the wrong platform for > handling stabilizations and keywords :/ I very much agree; some kind of minimal web app/API would probably be better. Cheers, Dirkjan

Re: #wg-stable: Reservations about a "STABLE" & "NeedsStable" bugzilla keywords (re: [gentoo-dev] New Working Group established to evaluate the stable tree)

2016-08-15 Thread james
On 08/15/2016 12:37 AM, Kent Fredric wrote: On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 16:29:43 +1200 Kent Fredric wrote: * The b.g.o workflow, bugs should not be considered fixed until the fix has reached the stable tree. Today the InVCS keyword exists for this purpose, but it is used to

Re: #wg-stable: Reservations about a "STABLE" & "NeedsStable" bugzilla keywords (re: [gentoo-dev] New Working Group established to evaluate the stable tree)

2016-08-14 Thread Kent Fredric
On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 16:29:43 +1200 Kent Fredric wrote: > > * The b.g.o workflow, bugs should not be considered fixed until the > >fix has reached the stable tree. Today the InVCS keyword exists for > >this purpose, but it is used to varying degree amongst developers.

#wg-stable: Reservations about a "STABLE" & "NeedsStable" bugzilla keywords (re: [gentoo-dev] New Working Group established to evaluate the stable tree)

2016-08-14 Thread Kent Fredric
On Sun, 14 Aug 2016 23:35:58 +0200 Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: > * The b.g.o workflow, bugs should not be considered fixed until the >fix has reached the stable tree. Today the InVCS keyword exists for >this purpose, but it is used to varying degree amongst developers.