Collecting and fixing pet peeve bugs

[Matthew Miller]

On Fri, Aug 04, 2006 at 07:31:53PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
> >> That might be a good idea, or a blocker bug. How do we make sure that
> >> not too many or too obscure bugs get set to this keyword / blockerbug?
> >> Just remove abusing bugs?
> > Yeah, although we'd have to carefully pick the keyword so as to not offend
> > someone if *their* pet peeve bug got removed.
> I must say I'm more in favor of a blocker bug (since I'm unfamiliar with
> the use of keywords)

I'm not sure a blocker bug is really appropriate, as by definition it's
unlikely all the dependencies will ever be resolved.

Keywords are really trivial.

-- 
Matthew Miller           mattdm at mattdm.org          <http://mattdm.org/>
Boston University Linux      ------>              <http://linux.bu.edu/>