From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Michael Albinus Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Basic questions about the triage process Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2015 10:06:05 +0100 Message-ID: <877fjvyole.fsf@gmx.de> References: <83ege5dvra.fsf@gnu.org> <837fjvdf89.fsf@gnu.org> <83oad7b845.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1451552808 24815 80.91.229.3 (31 Dec 2015 09:06:48 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2015 09:06:48 +0000 (UTC) Cc: ahyatt@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, Noam Postavsky To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Dec 31 10:06:39 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1aEZBt-0003NH-Ud for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 31 Dec 2015 10:06:38 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:55159 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aEZBs-0001bN-Ue for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 31 Dec 2015 04:06:36 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53713) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aEZBf-0001bF-1k for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 31 Dec 2015 04:06:23 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aEZBZ-0005PP-W8 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 31 Dec 2015 04:06:22 -0500 Original-Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.19]:57370) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aEZBZ-0005PJ-MZ; Thu, 31 Dec 2015 04:06:17 -0500 Original-Received: from detlef.gmx.de ([87.146.51.9]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx003) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0M4WNA-1a2GSB1WQO-00yj9C; Thu, 31 Dec 2015 10:06:07 +0100 In-Reply-To: <83oad7b845.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Thu, 31 Dec 2015 05:38:18 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:elYfZSliHvo1fR9OVc1PvGkoflT/Y5azFQyb+mV30ttVemKWSGc BQzBsas3G6ywt7SvG8CsyeVlWdp4NI+KjzdTX4yj6k0c4BHniEnGLI0IJ6n7b43mnJrkxv/ 7+e+ef0xNYnT83mg+GW79x5XOXTvgwxWsF8QUn77bbBjxVyUSKfZFExidDQGqfidVM7bI/e pF8tC9tLG0U1f5bRLXJnQ== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:zCUVqx7MsFA=:0Qi5jo67aCS7l+b6H80XeP fx5pquvUY0WkhHlSKMsOeVjz/x4JnmYhiaoi2+Kl5i96brzzzP1dgpQwXEdM9rwrj5i4b/J9I kTlr10a0ae8X1Ybji18XuLjJTI25phxtMRkucF+gWKjWSaWgkwxVvqc8/c182HTLRnwkTMisq h4Oka0pQu1JVfpyHXOahWzzql0CqE81+MpAo9tPd+OmGdQvNGQLNV4GR/9ABH5AXGTHKjFAYB KNehHEVCfO0pHTQr9zKfo6SMJnfkCNwKevTNgXnYEtT37hroMxI8xSOlPXGWOSOYBb9G0CWLk TmwESb0BWPflspUVQbkxJqcWxpJflXQbSTw+M8rMsG95snglTmllXSLxQV09b7xT9w/CisbXL jyfGie3EQPqGn8lIR9DzujoxtVHknHnQvlzPEGt4uLWTqYl8yoNeuOJYJeSa4uVihagoGkCQC 7ChaTAn+03bv2kgP8/tkyENVT4nf4koycJqnf2sfMuIu1/9ooTu9I7NRDOg5XhGxGeZiXnYoh 699nI+MMRYzPMpqUq2Y7HglBc09Q0aj/EXYSjeUAE0yjS5vztJF9r80Jqo5PbRsb9czpxXO22 riDbNV+sO+95RuHpdq/SOevtWzzOuVJJPIwrLPBjrusygoDuU9+FNBM8DVETlESOIO+6EQkem of04s3Efz4QsMpZDRioNdymtUKjbumAvr4Jyw6yU10dhvGHvUGFuphfb1wVTdvPcS5DbuqWyr giy/n6PdMhoz/5ux6OFtytk1+WjFK8hr8cdhvQV7O5rVt6LGMzfY8GoTNIk5MjNPaW89Y7yA X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 212.227.15.19 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:197241 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: >> On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 12:21 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> > >> > One needs to read the error message and resubmit the control message >> > modified as appropriate. E.g., one example I tend to bump into is >> > when I merge a bug with another one, and debbugs refuses because their >> > state is different -- in that case one needs to change the state of >> > one of the two bugs and then resubmit the merge directive. >> >> Is there some reason not to use forcemerge? > > It still requires a new control message, so what I said is still > valid. And as long as you do have to send a new control message, why > not do it right? > > Also, note this caveat: > >> Note: you cannot merge with an archived bug - you must unarchive it first. > > IOW, even forcemerge won't always work. debbugs-gnu could automate this scenario, in case it is desired. Just request it :-) Best regards, Michael.