Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2014 17:19:36 -0700 From: Kevin Oberman <rkoberman@gmail.com> To: marino@freebsd.org Cc: Torsten Zuehlsdorff <mailinglists@toco-domains.de>, Eitan Adler <lists@eitanadler.com>, Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@gmx.de>, FreeBSD Ports ML <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>, Stephen Hurd <shurd@sasktel.net>, Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com> Subject: Re: [FreeBSD-Announce] FreeBSD bug tracking moves from GNATS to Bugzilla Message-ID: <CAN6yY1uACTF7gk1qif9DJ1kyGCqOmnuX_xDPZCH%2Bs4pxc7HQxw@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <538ED1CA.4020907@marino.st> References: <92E4FB10-DDC8-4B3E-9242-4E8494491630@FreeBSD.org> <538DBAEC.5060905@gmail.com> <538E2924.3090002@gmx.de> <538E2AC9.7010309@sasktel.net> <538E32E5.5040400@marino.st> <CAF6rxgnWxr8-oykj08yF-PbW9b=fU-uv08gxnRncMxe_e1tjgg@mail.gmail.com> <20140604003430.GB18109@lonesome.com> <538ECEC8.2090706@toco-domains.de> <538ED1CA.4020907@marino.st>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 12:59 AM, John Marino <freebsd.contact@marino.st> wrote: > On 6/4/2014 09:46, Torsten Zuehlsdorff wrote: > >> > >> I know for certain that people in the past have given up after > submitting > >> PRs that were never answered. While I know we don't have the manpower > to > >> deal with all of them, that should at least be our ideal. > > > > Yes. It is really frustrating to create a bug-report with a complete > > patch just to wait for some months and seeing that nothing happens. And > > even after offering help it is closed with "timeout" and the bug still > > exists. > > That's not what a timeout is. Timeout does not mean "close the PR > regardless after a certain about of time". PRs generally stay open > indefinitely unless the problem has been resolved or the situation is > obsolete. > > If what you said occurred, that was wrong. I'd have to see the actual > PR to verify no misunderstanding though. I just want to nip in the bud > some kind of misconcept about "timeouts" ... which means (for ports PRs) > any committer can taken over the PR and the maintainer has no right to > complain about that. The timeout is on the maintainer, not the PR. > > > > And yes: trivial bugs are important. If something trivial not work, why > > use it? So it should be very easy to submit a report. > > Non-sequitur. > Besides "trivial" being an extremely loaded word that doesn't indicate > the true cost of the fix, I see no relation of the severity of said bug > versus the reporting process. It would logically follow that critical > bugs should therefore be extremely difficult to report, which is, of > course, absurd. The process should be the same regardless. > > John > I think that there are two different timeouts involved. 1. Maintainer fails to respond to a port update PR and any committer can pick it up. PR is NOT closed. 2. Committer (possibly maintainer) looks at an old PR for a port that has been updated to a new port version. The commiter is unable to reproduce the problem and asks the submitter to confirm whether it has been fixed. If the submitter fails to respond, the PR is marked as timed out and closed. -- R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer, Retired E-mail: rkoberman@gmail.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAN6yY1uACTF7gk1qif9DJ1kyGCqOmnuX_xDPZCH%2Bs4pxc7HQxw>