No answer to easy bug policy
Toshio Kuratomi
a.badger at gmail.com
Mon Jul 14 20:42:13 UTC 2008
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
>> Patrice Dumas wrote:
>>> On Sat, Jul 12, 2008 at 10:59:24AM +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote:
>>>> On Sat, Jul 12, 2008 at 02:04:47AM +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote:
>>>>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/RahulSundaram/CollectiveMaintenance
>>>> I have hopefully adressed th ecomments, by stating that this is a
>>>> policy
>>>> for bug fixes, not easy bug as such. Also added a 3 weeks delay before
>>>> the procedure is started, precise a bit what is a bug easy to fix and
>>>> put explicitely the cleaning of blocker bugs on the reporter.
>>>
>>> Still on
>>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/RahulSundaram/CollectiveMaintenance
>>>
>> Instead of orphaning, what about adding comaintainers? That makes for
>> more responsibility on the part of the person who thinks that the bug
>> is an easy fix to evaluate this in terms of correctness, the future
>> effects of the patch, and what is going on upstream.
>
> The intro covers that:
>
> "If this occurs over a long period of time, the maintainers should seek
> out co-maintainers or just be orphaning the software packages they are
> not interested in. If it does happen for a shorter periods, others can
> act as a buffer to avoid the problem lingering for our user"
>
What I'm asking is instead of:
"If you don't answer after 2 weeks, a reminder should be sent, and if
not answered within a further 2 weeks the package will be orphaned
according to the policy stated at"
We could have:
"If you don't answer after 2 weeks, a reminder should be sent, and if
not answered within a further 2 weeks My_Username will be assigned as a
comaintainer and can make changes according to the policy stated at"
-Toshio
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20080714/0486f4ca/attachment.sig>
More information about the fedora-devel-list
mailing list