From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alex Vong Subject: Re: Tracking package submissions with Debbugs Date: Tue, 06 Sep 2016 09:24:11 +0800 Message-ID: <87fupd3jno.fsf@gmail.com> References: <874m6kbyg4.fsf@gmail.com> <57B5A049.6070206@goebel-consult.de> <87wpiwruyd.fsf@we.make.ritual.n0.is> <87inuf27h7.fsf@we.make.ritual.n0.is> <20160902002755.GA30382@jocasta.intra> <87vayfm821.fsf@we.make.ritual.n0.is> <8737liam03.fsf@gmail.com> <87fupimq6n.fsf_-_@gnu.org> <20160903210030.GE4019@macbook42.flashner.co.il> <87bn041jch.fsf@gmail.com> <20160904070509.GA1724@solar> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:57779) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bh57d-0001lr-Qq for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 05 Sep 2016 21:24:23 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bh57Y-0000bz-1b for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 05 Sep 2016 21:24:20 -0400 Received: from mail-pf0-x243.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400e:c00::243]:36131) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bh57X-0000bs-Qc for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 05 Sep 2016 21:24:15 -0400 Received: by mail-pf0-x243.google.com with SMTP id x24so558539pfa.3 for ; Mon, 05 Sep 2016 18:24:15 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20160904070509.GA1724@solar> (Andreas Enge's message of "Sun, 4 Sep 2016 09:05:09 +0200") List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: Andreas Enge Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org, ng0 Andreas Enge writes: > Hello, > > using debbugs corresponds to a suggestion I made a while ago, so I am > obviously in favour of it... > > On Sun, Sep 04, 2016 at 10:37:02AM +0800, Alex Vong wrote: >> > I think it would make sense to have the one bug report for the "target >> > package" and then all the packages that get pulled in along the way get >> > tacked on also. >> Hmm, but what if we have 2 target packages (A, B) pulling the same >> package (C) in? Then it is not obvious if C should live in A's or B's >> bug report. What do you think? > > I do not quite understand the problem with relating bug reports to packages. > The discussion sounds as if we considered one constantly open bug report per > package, which is maybe a misunderstanding on my part. I would say that bug > reports should correspond roughly to our current discussion threads on > guix-devel: Someone sends in a patch or patch series, which opens a new bug > (there seems to be the problem of git-sendmail still); there are replies back > and forth; in the end the patch is applied (or, from time to time, retracted), > and the bug is closed. In this way, we have an overview of pending patches > and are less likely to forget one. > My original thought is to have a bug report per version, so people can easily search for the packaging history for a particular version. But it sounds like your idea is better than mine, having an overview of pending patches is more important. > As for the non-emacs users, I intend to work as before: Subscribe to all the > bugs and have them end up in my mailbox, reply, and potentially close them > by mail. > I think per-bug subsciption is not working right now[0]. Do you know of any good alternatives? > Andreas [0]: https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=5439