Some BZ cleanups

[Thorsten Leemhuis]

Am Montag, den 09.01.2006, 10:26 -0800 schrieb Michael A. Peters:
> On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 18:35 +0100, Christian.Iseli at licr.org wrote:
> > t could be consistently searched for when making
> > > cleanup lists like this. 
> > 
> > Speaking about which: could it be a good idea to have two virtual assignees: 
> >  - one for new contributors seeking a sponsor
> >  - one for the rest of us
> > ?
> > 
> > Or maybe that's overly complicated...
> 
> I made the mistake once - since then, I look for the e-mail address in
> the owners.list before I decide to take it for review.
> 
> I think the way it is now is fine because sometimes I go through the
> FE-NEW and might make comments but not actually review on packages by
> new packagers, I probably would rarely look through a needs-sponsor bug.

Yeah, and the reverse (from a sponsors point of view) is exactly the
problem: The sponsor has to go though *all* bugs to find those waiting
for a sponsor. And that's a problem afaics because they (including me)
often don't do that.  

BTW, where is the problem if you "would rarely look through a
needs-sponsor bugs"? They need a sponsor for review, so if you're no
sponsor you can't do anything there in most cases anyway. Save time for
you, too.

But if others agree with you let's just use use another virtual assignee
for bugs waiting for a sponsor as Christian suggested. That would be
suitable for both parties afaics. 

Of course the packager can forget to change the assignee or to report
that he's searching for a sponsor. That will always happen, but that's
life.

CU
thl
-- 
Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora at leemhuis.info>