Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2014 09:57:45 +0200 From: Torsten Zuehlsdorff <mailinglists@toco-domains.de> To: Kevin Oberman <rkoberman@gmail.com>, marino@freebsd.org Cc: Stephen Hurd <shurd@sasktel.net>, Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com>, Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@gmx.de>, FreeBSD Ports ML <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>, Eitan Adler <lists@eitanadler.com> Subject: Re: [FreeBSD-Announce] FreeBSD bug tracking moves from GNATS to Bugzilla Message-ID: <539022F9.8000206@toco-domains.de> In-Reply-To: <CAN6yY1uACTF7gk1qif9DJ1kyGCqOmnuX_xDPZCH%2Bs4pxc7HQxw@mail.gmail.com> References: <92E4FB10-DDC8-4B3E-9242-4E8494491630@FreeBSD.org> <538DBAEC.5060905@gmail.com> <538E2924.3090002@gmx.de> <538E2AC9.7010309@sasktel.net> <538E32E5.5040400@marino.st> <CAF6rxgnWxr8-oykj08yF-PbW9b=fU-uv08gxnRncMxe_e1tjgg@mail.gmail.com> <20140604003430.GB18109@lonesome.com> <538ECEC8.2090706@toco-domains.de> <538ED1CA.4020907@marino.st> <CAN6yY1uACTF7gk1qif9DJ1kyGCqOmnuX_xDPZCH%2Bs4pxc7HQxw@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 05.06.2014 02:19, Kevin Oberman wrote: > On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 12:59 AM, John Marino <freebsd.contact@marino.st > <mailto:freebsd.contact@marino.st>> wrote: > > On 6/4/2014 09:46, Torsten Zuehlsdorff wrote: > >> > >> I know for certain that people in the past have given up after > submitting > >> PRs that were never answered. While I know we don't have the > manpower to > >> deal with all of them, that should at least be our ideal. > > > > Yes. It is really frustrating to create a bug-report with a complete > > patch just to wait for some months and seeing that nothing > happens. And > > even after offering help it is closed with "timeout" and the bug > still > > exists. > > That's not what a timeout is. Timeout does not mean "close the PR > regardless after a certain about of time". PRs generally stay open > indefinitely unless the problem has been resolved or the situation is > obsolete. > > If what you said occurred, that was wrong. I'd have to see the actual > PR to verify no misunderstanding though. I just want to nip in the bud > some kind of misconcept about "timeouts" ... which means (for ports PRs) > any committer can taken over the PR and the maintainer has no right to > complain about that. The timeout is on the maintainer, not the PR. > > > > And yes: trivial bugs are important. If something trivial not > work, why > > use it? So it should be very easy to submit a report. > > Non-sequitur. > Besides "trivial" being an extremely loaded word that doesn't indicate > the true cost of the fix, I see no relation of the severity of said bug > versus the reporting process. It would logically follow that critical > bugs should therefore be extremely difficult to report, which is, of > course, absurd. The process should be the same regardless. > > John > > > I think that there are two different timeouts involved. > > 1. Maintainer fails to respond to a port update PR and any committer can > pick it up. PR is NOT closed. > 2. Committer (possibly maintainer) looks at an old PR for a port that > has been updated to a new port version. The commiter is unable to > reproduce the problem and asks the submitter to confirm whether it has > been fixed. If the submitter fails to respond, the PR is marked as timed > out and closed. Neither was. It was a mistake by the comitter. We cleared the problem off-list. I wrote a new patch and it is already in the ports Greetings, Torsten
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?539022F9.8000206>