[Bug 166202] Review Request: perl-Template-Plugin-Class : Allow calling of class methods on arbitrary classes

[Michael Schwendt]

On Thu, 18 Aug 2005 00:46:24 -0400, Jeff Spaleta wrote:

> On 8/18/05, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> > You might realize that bugzilla doesn't have an email interface, and
> > therefore might not be an appropriate tool for QA, because QA, IMO
> > should performed by as many eyes as possible, and not by an "inner
> > circle" of those on the cc:-list of a particular PR ;)
> 
> You can wax eloquent about the many eyes theory all you want... i
> really dont care about the theory of whether or not you should be
> holding all the discussions in the mailinglist. I made my comment on
> the grounds of practicality. Both the packager and reviewer are
> communicating in bugzilla.. you are not. If you want to effect change
> in a timely manner you will have to take the comments to either the
> packager at some point.  There is absolutely no garuntee that the
> packager is watching the mailing list threads closely. If you want to
> make the best effort possible to make sure the packager gets this
> minor packaging issue fixed before he requests the first build.. you
> will most likely need to submit a comment directly to bugzilla. Please
> by all means use the mailing list to discuss the issue..but if you
> discuss it for too long without making your best effort to contact the
> packager via bugzilla, you'll miss your opportunity to get this fixed
> before the first package build.

Stop argueing with rhetoric like "best effort" or "inner circles"! Be glad
that somebody has been paying attention to detail and has taken the time
to point out a packaging bug. Instead of argueing about it here in 15
lines you could have cut'n'pasted the comment into bugzilla yourself.
Being subscribed to extras list and commits list is still a requirement
for all contributors. Such a subscription is useless if packagers rush
with their builds and don't give other subscribers a chance to comment on
cvs commits, for instance.