Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2003 16:43:09 +1000 (EST) From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> To: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Cc: Tim Robbins <tjr@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: PR mail (was: Re: NFS ftruncate patch for review) Message-ID: <20030721162908.P3398@gamplex.bde.org> In-Reply-To: <20030719225757.GA80468@rot13.obsecurity.org> References: <20030718064120.GA72366@dilbert.robbins.dropbear.id.au> <20030719033531.GA79812@dilbert.robbins.dropbear.id.au> <20030719175735.GA76229@HAL9000.homeunix.com> <20030719225757.GA80468@rot13.obsecurity.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 19 Jul 2003, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 19, 2003 at 10:57:36AM -0700, David Schultz wrote:
> > On Sat, Jul 19, 2003, Bruce Evans wrote:
> > > I've got the feeling that the default is sometimes (and more often than it
> > > used to be) freebsd-list-that-I'm-not-on. Ports PRs always went to somewhere
> > > that I didn't see. I rather liked this.
> >
> > I think some categories of bugs get sent to
> > {fs,security,standards,$arch}@. If you want
> > to see the bugs for a particular category, I
> > guess you have to be interested enough to
> > subscribe to the corresponding list.
>
> fs and security don't get PRs by default...some PRs are reassigned to
> the mailing lists because it targets the class of developers who might
> be interested in investigating the problem.
>
> The default PR destination is determined based on the category of the
> PR. Here is the current configuration
> (freefall:~gnats/gnats-adm/categories)
Many PRs are in the wrong category, especially initially, so this is not
a good way to determine their destination.
> pending: Misfiled PRs : gnats-admin : freebsd-bugbusters@freebsd.org
> #
> # Other categories
> #
> advocacy: Advocacy : freebsd-advocacy :
> alpha: Architecture (alpha) specific : freebsd-alpha :
> amd64: Architecture (amd64) specific : freebsd-amd64 :
> bin: All other sources : freebsd-bugs :
> conf: Configuration files : freebsd-bugs :
> docs: Documentation : freebsd-doc :
> gnu: GNU sources : freebsd-bugs :
> i386: Architecture (i386) specific : freebsd-i386 :
> ia64: Architecture (ia64) specific : freebsd-ia64 :
> java: Java support : freebsd-java :
> junk: Wastebin : gnats-admin :
> kern: Kernel sources : freebsd-bugs :
> misc: Miscellaneous : freebsd-bugs :
> ports: The ports collection : freebsd-ports-bugs :
> powerpc: Architecture (powerpc) specific : freebsd-ppc :
> sparc64: Architecture (sparc) specific : freebsd-sparc64 :
> standards: Standards conformance issues : freebsd-standards :
> www: FreeBSD website : freebsd-www :
I was on most of these of possible interest except freebsd-i386. Sending
"i386" PRs to it is especially bad since most "i386" PRs are misclassified.
There are relatively very few purely MD details in FreeBSD and relatively
few purely i386 bugs since the i386 subsystem is old and mostly debugged.
I looked at the most recent 5 "i386" PRs a couple of days ago. All of
them were misclassified -- they were all for MI drivers. Most submitters
wouldn't be able to tell if a bug in a MI driver was an i386 one even if
it was.
Bruce
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030721162908.P3398>