[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Processed: Re: bug#19717: 24.4.50; printing.el still uses ps-eval-sw

From: Eli Zaretskii
Subject: Re: Processed: Re: bug#19717: 24.4.50; printing.el still uses ps-eval-switch
Date: Mon, 23 May 2016 20:00:51 +0300

> Cc: address@hidden
> From: Paul Eggert <address@hidden>
> Date: Mon, 23 May 2016 09:44:44 -0700
> On 05/23/2016 09:32 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> >> >Closed bugs are not included in the list at the top of
> >> >http://debbugs.gnu.org/19759
> > They are for me.
> What I've noticed, is that http://debbugs.gnu.org/19759 is often cached 
> (whether in my browser or somewhere else, I haven't checked), and when I 
> close a blocking bug the closed bug is still listed on that web page as 
> a blocker, until I refresh the cache. This is independent of whether the 
> bug is still listed as a blocker.

IME, the bug is still listed as blocking long after it was closed, no
matter how many times I refresh the browser page.  But when I send the
control message to the tracker that unblocks it, the next refresh of
the browser updates the display by removing that bug.

So if some cache is involved in this, it reacts differently to closing
a bug and to removing it from the blockers list.

> Glenn is right: it shouldn't be necessary to remove the bug as a 
> blocking bug. If there is something other than caching that is causing 
> this problem it'd be nice to know what it is.

Hey, I tried, okay?  I didn't do it because I deliberately ignored
Glenn's requests.  I even told him in the past (off list) that what he
asks for didn't work for me.  I just don't want to let software
problems prevent me from doing my job.  If there's a bug there
somewhere that causes the phenomenon I described above, I'm all for
fixing it, and will be the first to avoid sending control messages
when it is fixed -- it's not like I enjoy writing those messages.


reply via email to

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