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 1NyLwH-0001T2-3d for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 04 Apr 2010 09:16:17 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9C0BFE0C22; Sun, 4 Apr 2010 09:16:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-pw0-f53.google.com (mail-pw0-f53.google.com [209.85.160.53]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64CF2E0944 for ; Sun, 4 Apr 2010 09:16:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: by pwj10 with SMTP id 10so2169707pwj.40 for ; Sun, 04 Apr 2010 02:16:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:sender:received:in-reply-to :references:date:x-google-sender-auth:received:message-id:subject :from:to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=PYc0zw4qeYUkrmMYBSPn/62YTpJFhvW5S4qM/5oeBK0=; b=N47hkHLul9vuQUird1JCIv3UThLiVGzl1lK9/rVgY7JGZocKG5cQysEs3aKU7FHk8M x7XAfjcXuGjCQRKNI/f0CIjtq/Sabuz+ByGQiK7a+yVVPcjCubcLtGcpVvacUSdTnwdA UQvhSEP9PleZvbFi/dHXKaatHYVMO4k1NXazA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=jehqj1tfQxPcVi7eJuO4CXaIWWxYYsFmrr7UronFXKZRSXipUpxsgx6clePL2zZw2l 1AjBk9Rr6lKkmcwVVX5wuIbNzleC5/9RPjiSSmOcSYuiorB2rsqspA3TzfQkcW4YE9HA OcbvZWR+mTK6fO9zo4xLx6WibRY+ozwvUK6os= 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 Sender: nirbheek.chauhan@gmail.com Received: by 10.140.191.19 with HTTP; Sun, 4 Apr 2010 02:16:03 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4BB85674.3070906@gentoo.org> References: <4BB70F5E.7010101@gentoo.org> <1270330558.15538.4.camel@keitaro.perronet.esiee.net> <4BB85674.3070906@gentoo.org> Date: Sun, 4 Apr 2010 14:46:03 +0530 X-Google-Sender-Auth: df3d242b6de576ba Received: by 10.141.124.13 with SMTP id b13mr2827410rvn.284.1270372563822; Sun, 04 Apr 2010 02:16:03 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Should we disable RESOLVED LATER from bugzilla? From: Nirbheek Chauhan To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: eb0a21d8-447d-4e66-825f-c29e5144b271 X-Archives-Hash: 9e1d9ef7861227cc70b4b9f46a5540d2 On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 2:35 PM, Petteri R=C3=A4ty w= rote: > On 04/04/2010 12:35 AM, Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote: >> You are trying to remove a valid status for a case that has been badly >> managed ??? Speaking for gnome herd, afaik, all bugs marked LATER are >> for the simple reason they will be done later and no other status would >> be fine expect REJECTED maybe, but we don't want to say that to the face >> of the reported like this do we ? >> > > And why not just keep them open as suggested? > Because often there is no reason whatsoever to keep it open. People want a package to be bumped that we *know* has been released, is in the overlay (or will end up there soon), and will go into the tree with GNOME 2.30. I see no reason whatsoever to keep it open. If we start doing that, we'll end up with tons of extra bugs on our hands. We already have pages that have the status of bumped packages,[1] so we know what needs to be done. 1. http://dev.gentoo.org/~nirbheek/gnome/2.30/status.html --=20 ~Nirbheek Chauhan Gentoo GNOME+Mozilla Team