Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1998 23:31:50 -0400 (EDT) From: Tim Vanderhoek <hoek@hwcn.org> To: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com> Cc: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@FreeBSD.ORG>, committers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: IMPORTANT: PRs in suspended state Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.3.96.980412230449.29884A-100000@james.hwcn.org> In-Reply-To: <199804130126.TAA27099@mt.sri.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 12 Apr 1998, Nate Williams wrote: > This seems silly to me, and makes us look even less professional. There > is no difference between 'open' and 'suspended' at all. Putting a PR in > suspended state is essentially the same as deleting it. I disagree. Let's see what happens, if anyone picks these up. There are always people asking "what can I do?"; now we have something easy to point them to (simply pointing at the bugslist as a whole is not easy). > IMHO, going through the PR DB 'just to suspend/close a bunch of PR's > makes us look unprofessional. The only thing I can think is that the > purpose of changing the state is to make us look more professional, and > this does just the opposite (especially to the people who submitted the > PRs). I disagree strongly. Have you (Nate) ever read through anything even approaching a signficant portion of the PRs within the last year or two? The current PR database, if anything, makes us look unprofessional. Look... I checked into a couple (somewhat more than a couple, actually :) of the PRs phk closed to see if I had any qualms with any of the closures. Of those, the only one he didn't do 100% correctly (IMHO :) was misc/6276 "Can't connect to www.FreeBSD.ORG", but even that one fortune smiled on him and 1) other reasons to close it were mentioned, 2) submitter didn't complain (that-I-know-of/yet). Even still, one out of many-many-many is a pretty damn good record. I have read too old PRs which made me stare at the screen and ask "What the heck are we supposed to do with that?". It takes a strong respected man with a solid head and broad knowledge base (I can justify each of those requirements on request) to finally deal with some of these PRs. Unless you have another solution (and if you don't believe their is a problem you aren't using the PR system (most likely because of the PR system's very problems)), I suggest simply responding to individual PRs that are closed/dealt-with inappropriately, instead of the quoted style of general complaints. In summary, I support phk 100%. Go Poul! Go! On a related non-sequitor, it was decided on the -docs list that -doc related PRs (excluding those to manpages, of course) should be assigned to the freebsd-docs list, similar to the assignments done to the freebsd-ports list. 1) Any comments? 2) Steve (if I have been firy and concise enough that my audience is still reading :), does this require any special set-up with gnats, or can the Responsible just be changed to "freebsd-docs"? Finally, one last piece of advice to anyone (phk included) handling PRs... Search the freebsd-bugs list for every PR you deal with. It's only necessary to search on the PR number. Sometimes important information not originally emailed to bug-followup@FreeBSD.ORG will show-up, instructing you to either close or leave-open the PR. -- Outnumbered? Maybe. Outspoken? Never! tIM...HOEk To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.GSO.3.96.980412230449.29884A-100000>