No answer to easy bug policy

[Patrice Dumas]

On Sat, Jul 12, 2008 at 07:30:13AM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
>
> First of all, I agree that non-repsonsive ness to easy bugs and / or  
> bugs with patches attached is an issue.
>
> But I'm not sure this is a good solution. There are really 2 problems here:
> 1) The person responsible for the package is letting these bugs linger
> 2) Others do not fix it, even though they could, because they are afraid
>    of stepping on each other's toes, as you correctly point out.
>
> I feel that your policy completely fails to address 2), whereas that  
> might be one of the more important points. For example I don't mind  

I agree. But this is not the intent of this policy, I mean even if 2) is
easier (and it has became a lot easier already) it may happen that
something is needed to have the maintainer react.

> other people touching my packages _at all_, which can be seen from there  
> ACL's. So we could have a policy that says that "easy fixes" (whatever  
> the definition) may be done by anyone with CVS extras without a prior  
> headsup, when the ACL's allow it. IOW, codify in policy that the ACL  
> signals how much a developer minds other people touching his packages.

I don't think we should mix the ACL with the intent to allow anybody to
fix packages. Having open ACL also allows to have a package fixed for
cases already covered by the WhoIsAllowedToModifyWhichPackages policy,
for example.

> Another possible solution would be a I don't mind my toes getting  
> stepped on list in the wiki.

I think that it should better be in the packagedb.

But I am not sure that it will fix the case I did the policy for, since
if somebody is really opened like you are, a simple comment in the bug
like 'you can do it' is very low cost, but I personally have never seen
such a comment on the typical bugs that triggered me to do this policy.

--
Pat