On Fri, 26 Oct 2007, James Carlson wrote: > timeless writes: >> On 10/26/07, Valerie Bubb Fenwick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> No data, but there are nearly daily requests. Sometimes more. >> >> I'm partly trying to understand how much time is devoted to this work, >> and whether we're trying to streamline it or just reproduce it >> (I don't mind either way, since you seem comfortable with it). > > I'd say that delegation of authority isn't bugster's long suit. It > was designed for an environment where there's a central IT group, and > everyone has to work through them to make changes. > > On the plus side, this means that if someone is proposing a category > that's questionable in nature (such as "other" or "generic" -- the > sorts of no-zip-sorting-bins where bugs go to die -- or "foobar1.2" -- > using extraneous version information), someone can clue in the > proposer before too much damage is done.
Yes, that is the point. We no longer wanted "win98" as a release value for product "solaris", and other such nonsense. > I think a more distributed approach (making category "owners" > responsible for subcategories) would probably be more fitting for > OpenSolaris. Do we want completely detached bug databases? I would also caution a bit against this - lots of folks that "own" a specific category are actually very clueless about good bug hygeine, often suggesting bad ideas like "other" or "privateprojectcodename" and it can sometimes take a lot of convincing to get them to select a reasonable name instead. More distributed is good, completely distributed will lead to a lot of junk. Trust me, I cleaned up so much garbage from our transition out of BT+, back when anyone could do anything to any product. Valerie -- Valerie Fenwick, http://blogs.sun.com/bubbva Solaris Security Technologies, Developer, Sun Microsystems, Inc. 17 Network Circle, Menlo Park, CA, 94025. 650-786-0461 _______________________________________________ tools-discuss mailing list tools-discuss@opensolaris.org
