From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Andrew Hyatt Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Handling bugs in obsolete code Date: Wed, 06 Jan 2016 22:27:30 -0500 Message-ID: References: <20081129.145347.35808910.hanche@math.ntnu.no> <20081129.155222.124907962.hanche@math.ntnu.no> <20081129.161126.71259916.hanche@math.ntnu.no> <5vy4c46ifr.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <83oacz5188.fsf@gnu.org> <83y4c32wwf.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1452137279 26557 80.91.229.3 (7 Jan 2016 03:27:59 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2016 03:27:59 +0000 (UTC) Cc: rgm@gnu.org, hanche@math.ntnu.no, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Jan 07 04:27:54 2016 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 1aH1Eu-00034r-Kq for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 07 Jan 2016 04:27:52 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:56719 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aH1Et-0002JM-JH for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 06 Jan 2016 22:27:51 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49961) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aH1Eg-0002JE-73 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 06 Jan 2016 22:27:39 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aH1Eb-0000dy-81 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 06 Jan 2016 22:27:38 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-qk0-x235.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400d:c09::235]:36283) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aH1Eb-0000dP-3q; Wed, 06 Jan 2016 22:27:33 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-qk0-x235.google.com with SMTP id q19so115491081qke.3; Wed, 06 Jan 2016 19:27:33 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version:content-type; bh=ydzFMP9So97ofbPtXoNeiPSrltvqCNZujM6+ZWqEvPE=; b=uQEftC4+3/vs+gmfbTLTy81SbzHE3cocy30C7ttCD4V7k+h9T9GHsd5PDU8uSU4G7S 9gyre2NbL/7CRZA0vmJSRmxPByjwlT2kXoidexqKbWU3In2Pev3JJt0dx+HZQfJCJOgl hwDl5G+ZND69yXO4GBwBz1uXd4wLi+t5G19WYQJ8mcrULnmONDXA39yr8J+eP+XAKpJ/ dBbk1iOWpGqgGbFtO8qbcmzjgep37eA+3G9EGKq2KJUNJLrBM5Fb6xwnA+HtT3EBTEIt UJPOFu4Mbl7pDaSDYSmUEvZznFgt6tkE0RYN95mGA75rsos7eq+kxbObGcnTWXUzL7IP vZiQ== X-Received: by 10.55.76.15 with SMTP id z15mr90209853qka.32.1452137252706; Wed, 06 Jan 2016 19:27:32 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from Andrews-MacBook-Pro.local.ahyatt-laptop (cpe-74-73-128-199.nyc.res.rr.com. [74.73.128.199]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id j67sm37672331qgj.35.2016.01.06.19.27.31 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 06 Jan 2016 19:27:31 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: (John Wiegley's message of "Wed, 06 Jan 2016 17:58:17 -0800") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1.50 (darwin) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2607:f8b0:400d:c09::235 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:197720 Archived-At: John Wiegley writes: >>>>>> Andrew Hyatt writes: > >> On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 10:46 PM Eli Zaretskii wrote: >>> From: Andrew Hyatt >>> >>> Has anyone considered putting these obsolete packages in the gnu ELPA? I'm >>> not sure about the bug policy, but I'd guess that bugs shouldn't be filed >>> against ELPA packages. > >> AFAIK bugs are files against ELPA packages like they are against the >> core Emacs. So moving to ELPA will not change this aspect of obsolete >> packages. > >> (It also feels wrong to move them to ELPA just because they are >> obsolete. ELPA is supposed to be home for new and advanced stuff, not >> for obsolete stuff. If someone steps forward wanting to maintain an >> obsolete package, then a move to ELPA might make good sense, though.) > >> That's a fair point. Maybe there could be some special ELPA repository for >> obsolete packages. But what I'm mostly trying to figure out is if there is >> *any* way to get code to be completely unmaintained. We are, after all, >> trying to reduce the number of bugs (see the thread on 4k bugs) overall, and >> this is one way to do that. So the only way people would agree on right now, >> is if we remove the code entirely from emacs distribution. But I suspect >> that such a change would be rejected, even from obsolete packages, because >> someone might still be depending on them. > > What if we just use an "obsolete" tag, so the bugs could be filtered out from > our running total, but they still remain open? That would help, although it would still mean that new bugs would have to be triaged and tagged as obsolete, as opposed to not existing at all. If we did such a thing, it'd be nice if debbugs filtered obsolete tags by default. Another variant on that is to say that all bugs against obsolete packages have "minor" severity, which would accomplish the same thing without needing a new tag. On the hopefully rare occasions in which the bug really is severe (crashes emacs, corrupts data, etc) it can be have a non-minor severity.