From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Q1aQg-00059G-RQ for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Mon, 21 Mar 2011 09:25:34 +0100 Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Q1aOx-0006LI-He for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Mon, 21 Mar 2011 09:23:47 +0100 Received: from ip545070eb.adsl-surfen.hetnet.nl ([84.80.112.235]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 21 Mar 2011 09:23:47 +0100 Received: from koen by ip545070eb.adsl-surfen.hetnet.nl with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 21 Mar 2011 09:23:47 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org From: Koen Kooi Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2011 09:23:36 +0100 Message-ID: References: <20110311081950.GG7353@excalibur.local> <1300385432.2298.33.camel@saphir> <1300396447.30423.2113.camel@rex> <4D86B486.6030205@mentor.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ip545070eb.adsl-surfen.hetnet.nl User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.1.16) Gecko/20101127 Shredder/3.0.11pre In-Reply-To: <4D86B486.6030205@mentor.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0.1 Subject: Re: OE Bugzilla Future X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org List-Id: Using the OpenEmbedded metadata to build Distributions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2011 08:25:34 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 21-03-11 03:14, Tom Rini wrote: > On 03/18/2011 12:57 AM, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote: >> 2011/3/17 Richard Purdie: >>> On Thu, 2011-03-17 at 19:10 +0100, Michael 'Mickey' Lauer wrote: >>>> I'm in favor of keeping it, cleaning it up, and improve >>>> the integration with patchwork / git. Throwing it away >>>> would be a very bad sign to all those countless people >>>> who've gone through the pains of actually working with >>>> the bugtracker. >>> >>> The simple question is who is actually going to sort out the mess its >>> in? >>> >>> Who is going to look after it on a continuing basis? >>> >>> If there isn't ownership, nothing is going to change. >> >> Actually I feel the real problem is that: >> - people did not want to get bugs assigned to them (at least that was >> what someone told me in the past) >> - we're lacking a good notion of package or recipe ownership, so even >> if we had someone acting as a bug manager, (s)he would have a hard >> time to find out who to assign an issue to. >> >> and of course it takes discipline to look at regular intervals in the >> bug tracker to see if there are issues that affect the recipes you >> feel responsible for. >> A discipline that few people have and that is also easy to forget if >> there is only very rarely something for you. >> >> So it is more of a process issue. >> (btw this may be something that could be picked up by the TSC). > > The feeling of the TSC thus far has been "where are the active > volunteers to use BTS (bugzilla, whatever)". This far in the thread I > count one. I count none, actually, since you said 'active volunteers'. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin) iD8DBQFNhwsIMkyGM64RGpERApNUAJ9V86nRpwP8mTNW9b48FdaTjrTBMgCfXteG GzEx7YQ0Mpuw1Yq1A2ZH6ao= =UJ6A -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----