From owner-freebsd-stable Sun Sep 17 11:46:13 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from jade.chc-chimes.com (jade.chc-chimes.com [216.28.46.6]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 899D137B423 for ; Sun, 17 Sep 2000 11:46:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: by jade.chc-chimes.com (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 0D2051C41; Sun, 17 Sep 2000 14:46:09 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2000 14:46:09 -0400 From: Bill Fumerola To: Jordan Hubbard Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: In summary.. [Re: I'll be rolling a 4.1.1 release on September 25th] Message-ID: <20000917144608.Y47559@jade.chc-chimes.com> References: <9028.969215627@winston.osd.bsdi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0i In-Reply-To: <9028.969215627@winston.osd.bsdi.com>; from jkh@winston.osd.bsdi.com on Sun, Sep 17, 2000 at 11:33:47AM -0700 X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 3.3-STABLE i386 Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Sun, Sep 17, 2000 at 11:33:47AM -0700, Jordan Hubbard wrote: > [Watch your cc line, boofoo; you just cc'd -stable TWICE] Glass houses, stones: Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2000 02:52:33 -0700 From: Jordan Hubbard To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Cc: stable@FreeBSD.ORG, cg@FreeBSD.ORG, dg@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: In summary.. [Re: I'll be rolling a 4.1.1 release on September 25th] > As to how and why PRs don't work, that's kind of a pointless argument > until/unless someone has something better to suggest. Nobody likes > the PR database and has cursed it since almost the first week of its > adoption, but the whole singing-and-dancing keystone replacement > project never left the ground. Ahem. Keystone is still a possible alternative, and I've pretty much assumed co-"lead developer" role in that project. The only thing it lacks is a CLI interface similar to edit-pr. I'm not foolish enough to think I could cram keystone down committers throats with only a web interface. The advantages of keystone are mostly cosmetic (there are some logical things it does better then GNATS, though): better reporting, sexier interface, more complex "followup" system, etc. I don't see how they'll solve the problems that we're facing which have nothing to do with the bug reporting system but the lazy-ass and/or busy committers(of which I fall into both groups). > > the system for whatever reason, we should be taking a serious look at > > just giving him maintainership of lpr so he can apply his umpteen new > > You know how the proposal-for-committers process works. Go for it. Evidently my recommendations don't carry enough weight for the existing core, as several of my proposals have gone either unanswered or explicitly denied. I also think that since I don't consider myself even a lpd power-user I couldn't say anything beyond "Garance's patches fix a lot of problems that come up with lpd and he seems to have a fairly complete understanding of what needs to be done to make it better." If you feel such a statement would be enough, I'll formally make it. -- Bill Fumerola - Network Architect, BOFH / Chimes, Inc. billf@chimesnet.com / billf@FreeBSD.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message