Bugzilla - CVS/GIT tag
In an effort to remove the CVS/GIT tag, I was going to go through and start changing the versions based on when the bug was filed. I.e., look at when 1.1.10 was out, and any bugs filed in those dates with CVS/GIT tag get moved to 1.1.10. I'm thinking of starting with 0.9, as anything before that is _really_ old and not worth the effort... Anyone opposed to this plan? Also, the FIXME, NoAppDBEntry, and BugBuster should probably be removed...they're not that useful anyway... -- -Austin
Austin English wrote:
In an effort to remove the CVS/GIT tag, I was going to go through and start changing the versions based on when the bug was filed. I.e., look at when 1.1.10 was out, and any bugs filed in those dates with CVS/GIT tag get moved to 1.1.10. I'm thinking of starting with 0.9, as anything before that is _really_ old and not worth the effort... Agreed. Non need to generate huge volume of spam changing all the old versions. Especially for closed bugs.
Also, the FIXME, NoAppDBEntry, and BugBuster should probably be removed...they're not that useful anyway...
NoAppDBEntry might be useful if anyone tracks that. Others are pretty much useless. Vitaliy
On Wed, Dec 24, 2008 at 8:50 PM, Vitaliy Margolen <wine-devel(a)kievinfo.com> wrote:
Austin English wrote:
In an effort to remove the CVS/GIT tag, I was going to go through and start changing the versions based on when the bug was filed. I.e., look at when 1.1.10 was out, and any bugs filed in those dates with CVS/GIT tag get moved to 1.1.10. I'm thinking of starting with 0.9, as anything before that is _really_ old and not worth the effort... Agreed. Non need to generate huge volume of spam changing all the old versions. Especially for closed bugs.
Well, they all have to be moved so we can delete that version. I meant that anything that was before 0.9 will be labeled as 0.9. -- -Austin
"Austin English" <austinenglish(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Dec 24, 2008 at 8:50 PM, Vitaliy Margolen <wine-devel(a)kievinfo.com> wrote:
Austin English wrote:
In an effort to remove the CVS/GIT tag, I was going to go through and start changing the versions based on when the bug was filed. I.e., look at when 1.1.10 was out, and any bugs filed in those dates with CVS/GIT tag get moved to 1.1.10. I'm thinking of starting with 0.9, as anything before that is _really_ old and not worth the effort... Agreed. Non need to generate huge volume of spam changing all the old versions. Especially for closed bugs.
Well, they all have to be moved so we can delete that version. I meant that anything that was before 0.9 will be labeled as 0.9.
I'd suggest to replace CVS/GIT tag in existing bugs buy "unknown" and ask the reporter to fix it (as I initially suggested when I proposed to get rid CVS/GIT tag). -- Dmitry.
On Thu, Dec 25, 2008 at 10:39 AM, Dmitry Timoshkov <dmitry(a)codeweavers.com> wrote:
"Austin English" <austinenglish(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Dec 24, 2008 at 8:50 PM, Vitaliy Margolen <wine-devel(a)kievinfo.com> wrote:
Austin English wrote:
In an effort to remove the CVS/GIT tag, I was going to go through and start changing the versions based on when the bug was filed. I.e., look at when 1.1.10 was out, and any bugs filed in those dates with CVS/GIT tag get moved to 1.1.10. I'm thinking of starting with 0.9, as anything before that is _really_ old and not worth the effort...
Agreed. Non need to generate huge volume of spam changing all the old versions. Especially for closed bugs.
Well, they all have to be moved so we can delete that version. I meant that anything that was before 0.9 will be labeled as 0.9.
I'd suggest to replace CVS/GIT tag in existing bugs buy "unknown" and ask the reporter to fix it (as I initially suggested when I proposed to get rid CVS/GIT tag).
-- Dmitry.
I was attempting to avoid more bugzilla e-mails to set the version, and considering that most people won't know the version that they were using that long ago, it's at most a futile effort. Either way's fine with me, I'd just like to eliminate the version tag so we can quit getting 'CVS/GIT is deprecated e-mails'. -- -Austin
On Thu, 25 Dec 2008, Austin English wrote: [...]
I was attempting to avoid more bugzilla e-mails to set the version, and considering that most people won't know the version that they were using that long ago, it's at most a futile effort.
The email should ask them to retest with the current Wine and fill in the field with that version, rather than try to remember what they were using at the time.That would be useful and likely eliminate a lot of bugs (either because it'sfixed or due to lack of response). -- Francois Gouget <fgouget(a)free.fr> http://fgouget.free.fr/ Linux: It is now safe to turn on your computer.
On Fri, Dec 26, 2008 at 5:07 PM, Francois Gouget <fgouget(a)free.fr> wrote:
On Thu, 25 Dec 2008, Austin English wrote: [...]
I was attempting to avoid more bugzilla e-mails to set the version, and considering that most people won't know the version that they were using that long ago, it's at most a futile effort.
The email should ask them to retest with the current Wine and fill in the field with that version, rather than try to remember what they were using at the time.That would be useful and likely eliminate a lot of bugs (either because it'sfixed or due to lack of response).
-- Francois Gouget <fgouget(a)free.fr> http://fgouget.free.fr/ Linux: It is now safe to turn on your computer.
I've started with closed bugs at the moment, but I'll do that for the open ones. -- -Austin
participants (4)
-
Austin English -
Dmitry Timoshkov -
Francois Gouget -
Vitaliy Margolen