From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Nqk1r-0003Ud-RG for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 14 Mar 2010 09:22:36 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 65F25E0920; Sun, 14 Mar 2010 09:22:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from petteriraty.eu (host.petteriraty.eu [188.40.80.83]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6C61E089A for ; Sun, 14 Mar 2010 09:22:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [82.130.46.229] (qob5.kyla.fi [82.130.46.229]) by petteriraty.eu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E4FEA33F0A for ; Sun, 14 Mar 2010 09:22:21 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4B9CAA89.2030503@gentoo.org> Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2010 11:21:13 +0200 From: =?UTF-8?B?UGV0dGVyaSBSw6R0eQ==?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; fi; rv:1.8.1.23) Gecko/20090916 Thunderbird/2.0.0.23 Mnenhy/0.7.6.666 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Handling of keywording bugs with only one arch References: <4B9A936B.3070804@gentoo.org> <4B9BC65D.9000504@gentoo.org> <20100314025632.62333528@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <20100314025632.62333528@gentoo.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0.1 OpenPGP: id=B8E4ECF0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig8D719F5C3EFB3A6A811276AC" X-Archives-Salt: 4d3d8205-8f5e-4a5f-a933-12720d6e8221 X-Archives-Hash: b449a3a5fe9d3475a71d3ef39fb99956 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig8D719F5C3EFB3A6A811276AC Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 03/14/2010 10:56 AM, Ryan Hill wrote: > On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 19:07:41 +0200 > Petteri R=C3=A4ty wrote: >=20 >> When a bug is marked as fixed it doesn't show up in searches developer= s >> use so it's a matter of who reads the email and acts upon it. I don't >> see why maintainers would be any more likely to act than an arch team >> comprised of multiple people in the case of bigger arches. >=20 > Hasn't the running theme for the last couple weeks been about not touch= ing > packages you don't maintain and aren't throughly familiar with? ;) >=20 > Anyways, it's simply not the arch team's job to fix the issues that pop= up > unless they somehow caused them. If there's a bug in the ebuild an arc= h > tester missed it's the maintainer who is responsible for fixing it. >=20 You misunderstood what I meant. The action I am talking about is reopening the bug. Any developer who notices that a bug should be reopened should reopen it so it gets noticed. Regards, Petteri --------------enig8D719F5C3EFB3A6A811276AC Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJLnKqNAAoJEPeUsk245OzwL3UP/ihmjyTroxuwqDQZ2IrrLz3N oj578N34Isr2ASOT92Ul776kLNpFm68ckRrc1aDIk9KKzxKXu/BUE/tlA+y4Ejqh Zl5KvQq47uYU9hn0SjmzSyhhnZLBKRb8UrRTYiV1I/XdabyYjT9q4TqOW2KDRTX+ /m9fUEuJsqsoZl5K3MjrR8cJjdiil1NBBLNlX6/XVpCjgKroF+aqdjs8ni9d2QW/ v4TyqQV2pq86lX7iW61ZhXQGnwDIFqkE2MawqxXS4ZN6pnKmanHDzDw4tdc/lgLf AEtJ3qbs73kCPgFMqMcYP4eE6tYMIzreQ6mfuFuofNruYcMt3aHrxzLwGQpyHiKG k0HA6Z2sYXhGSVdF1D2ycl95bgp67Teu+WQvb9D0efwgs1k343DYBd/6TNMsnLzg R8Dq9kxoyqhoZ8B2zRET8lWAwBPoZeQBLurZRHAhKlp0ngafbs885cV02liXUaZT Lpa36VnnIjPx8Azotj9HHCDh/JW67Pbrvcz17Kf9BPmIsC8fpOjrXMVMJvXn8Qag jDn3irkBh//p+RVqrZzpZToWgEaWg0uImIb4zeNuu7kDR0JR8njEmDa2O2f+V23s IAQ3BivbuCq5SOB518iBWrstU4uhQS+4a91/n5K3GrjPie58XHAhEMZNsgHJn731 ngYAVvdkZ7p2m7GFKLxC =/XoZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig8D719F5C3EFB3A6A811276AC--