Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC Bugzilla interaction guide for devs editbugs users

2010-09-10 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Tue, 7 Sep 2010 21:30:34 + Robin H. Johnson robb...@gentoo.org wrote: On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 10:47:27PM +0200, Róbert Čerňanský wrote: 2.3. Upstream issues Do not close a bug (as RESOLVED/UPSTREAM) until it is fixed by upstream. If the reason you propose this is visibility,

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC Bugzilla interaction guide for devs editbugs users

2010-09-07 Thread Róbert Čerňanský
On Mon, 6 Sep 2010 08:32:16 + Robin H. Johnson robb...@gentoo.org wrote: [...] 2. Special cases As a user I'd like to see following: 2.3. Upstream issues Do not close a bug (as RESOLVED/UPSTREAM) until it is fixed by upstream. Robert -- Robert Cernansky E-mail: hslis...@zoznam.sk

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC Bugzilla interaction guide for devs editbugs users

2010-09-07 Thread Robin H. Johnson
On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 10:47:27PM +0200, Róbert Čerňanský wrote: 2.3. Upstream issues Do not close a bug (as RESOLVED/UPSTREAM) until it is fixed by upstream. This implies that the upstream is alive enough to fix it. I feel it should mean that the bug has been reported to upstream, and

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC Bugzilla interaction guide for devs editbugs users

2010-09-07 Thread Andreas K. Huettel
2.3. Upstream issues Do not close a bug (as RESOLVED/UPSTREAM) until it is fixed by upstream. This implies that the upstream is alive enough to fix it. I feel it should mean that the bug has been reported to upstream, and that state is documented in the bug. If we keep

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC Bugzilla interaction guide for devs editbugs users

2010-09-07 Thread dev-random
On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 09:30:34PM +, Robin H. Johnson wrote: This implies that the upstream is alive enough to fix it. I feel it should mean that the bug has been reported to upstream, and that state is documented in the bug. If we keep every upstream bug open instead of closed, we'd

[gentoo-dev] RFC Bugzilla interaction guide for devs editbugs users

2010-09-06 Thread Robin H. Johnson
Hi, After a discussion on IRC, a few of us were considering the value of adding suggestions on handling of bugs in Bugzilla from a developer (and editbugs user) perspective. These is the simplest set I have to start, but I'd really like other comments and ideas. 1. General case - You should

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC Bugzilla interaction guide for devs editbugs users

2010-09-06 Thread Alex Legler
On Mon, 6 Sep 2010 10:39:59 +0200, Dirkjan Ochtman d...@gentoo.org wrote: [...] 2.2. Security bugs  The developer should comment, but ONLY members of the security team  should:  - change whiteboard  - add/remove arches  - change bug status/reso The arches can still remove

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC Bugzilla interaction guide for devs editbugs users

2010-09-06 Thread Michael Weber
On 09/06/2010 10:39 AM, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote: On Mon, Sep 6, 2010 at 10:32, Robin H. Johnson robb...@gentoo.org wrote: After a discussion on IRC, a few of us were considering the value of adding suggestions on handling of bugs in Bugzilla from a developer (and editbugs user) perspective.