[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Bug trackers

From: Don Armstrong
Subject: Re: Bug trackers
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2008 13:24:05 -0800
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.17+20080114 (2008-01-14)

On Wed, 20 Feb 2008, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Feb 2008, Richard Stallman wrote:
> >     Debbugs currently is based on the assumption that every bug is
> >     assigned to at least one package. In terms of a distribution, this
> >     makes perfect sense, but it's different for applications. When you're
> >     developing a single application like emacs, I'd imagine you'd separate
> >     bugs into "components" or similar of the application, like "gtk
> >     interface", "documentation", or "elisp" (as examples; you all'd come
> >     up with better ones.)
> > 
> > Is it possible for all bugs to be initially assigned to "emacs"
> > and for maintainers to move them subsequently into other categories?
> Yes, we can assign bugs to emacs if there isn't a valid package or
> even if the submit mail wasn't able to be parsed.

This is now the case for the debbugs testbed. [It required a new
feature to be added, so if it fails for some reason, please let me

Don Armstrong

If I had a letter, sealed it in a locked vault and hid the vault
somewhere in New York. Then told you to read the letter, thats not
security, thats obscurity. If I made a letter, sealed it in a vault,
gave you the blueprints of the vault, the combinations of 1000 other
vaults, access to the best lock smiths in the world, then told you to
read the letter, and you still can't, thats security.
 -- Bruce Schneier

http://www.donarmstrong.com              http://rzlab.ucr.edu

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]