Re: [gentoo-dev] [v4] Planning for automatic assignment computation of bugs

Am Sonntag, den 04.01.2009, 18:06 +0100 schrieb Jeroen Roovers: > On Sun, 04 Jan 2009 17:02:21 + > Mike Auty wrote: > > > According to [1], "When the file lists multiple entries, then you > > assign the bug to the first maintainer, and CC the other > > maintainer(s) and herd(s)." So it looks

Re: [gentoo-dev] [v4] Planning for automatic assignment computation of bugs

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Robin H. Johnson wrote: > Neither set of rules is ideal. Ordering makes a lot of sense when you > just read it. Consider metadata with multiple maintainers and multiple > herds. Either you have to start assigning explicitly (requires editing > metadata

Re: [gentoo-dev] [v4] Planning for automatic assignment computation of bugs

On Sun, Jan 04, 2009 at 06:12:17PM +, Mike Auty wrote: > a) herds.xml per-herd priority flag (herd gets assigned) > b) metadata.xml priority element (can be opt-in or opt-out) > c) order of elements in metadata.xml > > I'm personally not keen on the order of elements, since adding meaning > to

Re: [gentoo-dev] [v4] Planning for automatic assignment computation of bugs

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] [v4] Planning for automatic assignment computation of bugs

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Robert Buchholz wrote: > 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 > preferen

Re: [gentoo-dev] [v4] Planning for automatic assignment computation of bugs

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. > > It seems sensible to me. I would've thought that

Re: [gentoo-dev] [v4] Planning for automatic assignment computation of bugs

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jeroen Roovers wrote: > I spotted that too but didn't remember putting it in black and white. :) > > 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 > ha

Re: [gentoo-dev] [v4] Planning for automatic assignment computation of bugs

On Sun, 04 Jan 2009 17:02:21 + Mike Auty wrote: > According to [1], "When the file lists multiple entries, then you > assign the bug to the first maintainer, and CC the other > maintainer(s) and herd(s)." So it looks as though the file should go > through the maintainers first and herds seco

Re: [gentoo-dev] [v4] Planning for automatic assignment computation of bugs

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Robert Buchholz wrote: > * Order in metadata.xml is what dictates assignee, i.e.: The first herd > or maintainer listed in the metadata.xml of the first CAT or CAT/PN > is who is assignee, all other follow as CC. Great work, just wanted to double

Re: [gentoo-dev] [v4] Planning for automatic assignment computation of bugs

On Sunday 19 October 2008, Robin H. Johnson wrote: > Now into it's Nth great year, I bring you the fourth edition of the > automatic assignment proposal. > > Previously: > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/48485 [v1] > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/49601 [v2] > ht

Re: [gentoo-dev] [v4] Planning for automatic assignment computation of bugs

"Robin H. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 12:32:44PM -0700, Alec Warner wrote: > > What if my herd email address is different from my bugzie address? > > Can I have both in herds.xml? What if my herd address *isn't* a > > bugzie account, will the world end? > > I don't

Re: [gentoo-dev] [v4] Planning for automatic assignment computation of bugs

On 23:01 Sat 18 Oct , Robin H. Johnson wrote: > 5. Javascript then appends the server results into the "Additional >Comments" box: a suggested assignee and suggested CC values, with logic >as to why. > 6. The wrangler can copy and paste the data into the fields, editing >further as

Re: [gentoo-dev] [v4] Planning for automatic assignment computation of bugs

On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 12:43:05PM -0700, Robin H. Johnson wrote: > On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 03:49:35PM +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > > > On Sat, 18 Oct 2008, Robin H Johnson wrote: > > > > > 3. If you want the default assignment to go to a maintainer, and NOT > > >the herd, move the elem

Re: [gentoo-dev] [v4] Planning for automatic assignment computation of bugs

On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 12:32:44PM -0700, Alec Warner wrote: > What if my herd email address is different from my bugzie address? > Can I have both in herds.xml? What if my herd address *isn't* a > bugzie account, will the world end? I don't know any herd where the herd email is not the same as th

Re: [gentoo-dev] [v4] Planning for automatic assignment computation of bugs

On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 03:49:35PM +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > > On Sat, 18 Oct 2008, Robin H Johnson wrote: > > > 3. If you want the default assignment to go to a maintainer, and NOT > >the herd, move the element further down in the metadata.xml! > > I disagree about this point. IMHO

Re: [gentoo-dev] [v4] Planning for automatic assignment computation of bugs

On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 08:47:15AM -0500, Jeremy Olexa wrote: > Robin H. Johnson wrote: >> Notes: >> -- >> 1. For handling no-herd, we should add an entry into >> herds.xml to >>catch it (maintainer-needed g.o). Every herd listed in an ebuild >> MUST be in >>herds.xml. > As rbu point

Re: [gentoo-dev] [v4] Planning for automatic assignment computation of bugs

On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 03:29:46PM +0200, Robert Buchholz wrote: > > 5. Javascript then appends the server results into the "Additional > >Comments" box: a suggested assignee and suggested CC values, with > > logic as to why. > > 6. The wrangler can copy and paste the data into the fields, edit

Re: [gentoo-dev] [v4] Planning for automatic assignment computation of bugs

On Sat, Oct 18, 2008 at 11:01 PM, Robin H. Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Now into it's Nth great year, I bring you the fourth edition of the > automatic assignment proposal. > > Previously: > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/48485 [v1] > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.g

Re: [gentoo-dev] [v4] Planning for automatic assignment computation of bugs

> On Sat, 18 Oct 2008, Robin H Johnson wrote: > 3. If you want the default assignment to go to a maintainer, and NOT >the herd, move the element further down in the metadata.xml! I disagree about this point. IMHO the procedure described in

Re: [gentoo-dev] [v4] Planning for automatic assignment computation of bugs

Robin H. Johnson wrote: Notes: -- 1. For handling no-herd, we should add an entry into herds.xml to catch it (maintainer-needed g.o). Every herd listed in an ebuild MUST be in herds.xml. As rbu pointed out, this is slightly incorrect. Most of my ebuilds contain no-herd. ;) As do ot

Re: [gentoo-dev] [v4] Planning for automatic assignment computation of bugs

On Sunday 19 October 2008, Robin H. Johnson wrote: > Now into it's Nth great year, I bring you the fourth edition of the > automatic assignment proposal. Yay! > 5. Javascript then appends the server results into the "Additional >Comments" box: a suggested assignee and suggested CC values, wi

[gentoo-dev] [v4] Planning for automatic assignment computation of bugs

Now into it's Nth great year, I bring you the fourth edition of the automatic assignment proposal. Previously: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/48485 [v1] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/49601 [v2] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/57159 [v3] Bleed