Re: BTS for GRUB 2 (Re: BTS overhaul)

[Robert Millan <rmh@aybabtu.com>]

On Sun, Dec 16, 2007 at 12:27:03PM +0200, Vesa Jääskeläinen wrote:
> Robert Millan wrote:
> > The creature has been seized:
> > 
> >   http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?group=grub
> > 
> > I've left the bugs that apply to documentation since we'll probably reuse
> > much of GRUB Legacy's and they will still apply.
> > 
> > Finally the BTS is usable for keeping track of GRUB 2 stuff.
> > 
> > Two thoughts:
> > 
> >   - The website still prompts to send GRUB 2 queries to grub-devel,
> >   should we adjust that to make them use the BTS?
> 
> Yes. And for grub legacy users (and version info what is grub legacy)
> there should be note that these are no longer being processed or
> something like that.

Ok then.  I suggest that we move grub-legacy-bugs.en.html to
grub-2-bugs.en.html, and create a new grub-legacy-bugs.en.html prompting
reporters to try reproduce their problem in GRUB 2 (if they have a problem)
or update their patches to GRUB 2.

> >   - The BTS sends bug notifications to bug-grub.  Rather than moving those
> >   to this list, perhaps it'd be a good idea to claim bug-grub for GRUB 2
> >   (and move GRUB Legacy queries to /dev/full), so that bug tracking (which
> >   tends to be quite verbose) is separate and this list can be used for
> >   general discussion more confortably.
> > 
> > What do you think?
> 
> I think now would be good spot to re-configure mailing lists :)
> 
> bug-grub@ sounds like a bug list.
> grub-devel@ sound link a development list.

Good.  I'm subscribing to bug-grub then.

Another question is, how will we do context reply for patches?  The BTS doesn't
seem to easily allow this.  Maybe we could followup on our replies via
bug-grub ?  But a problem with that is that it'll be hard to see the full
context of a discussion when browsing bugs.

Another problem is that submitter is likely not subscribed to bug-grub (does
the message you get when trying to write there without being subscribed say you
have to subscribe, or that you have to wait for someone to process your mail
(which won't happen) ?).

> grub-help@ or grub-users@ would be more fit for user discussions. Are
> there any GNU "standards" for these? And perhaps require to switch to
> subscribe only lists.

The convention in GNU projects is to call them "help-$project".

-- 
Robert Millan

<GPLv2> I know my rights; I want my phone call!
<DRM> What use is a phone call, if you are unable to speak?
(as seen on /.)