FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Gentoo > Gentoo Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 04-26-2010, 10:34 AM
Matti Bickel
 
Default RFC: bugzilla flags for arch-testing

On 04/26/2010 11:40 AM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote:
> To make it easier to find stabilization bugs with arch-testers'
> comments, I'd like to add new flags to Gentoo bugzilla.

Can you explain how the "TESTED" Keyword is not sufficient for your
goal? It explicitly states: "Ebuilds that have been marked as tested by
arch testers".
 
Old 04-26-2010, 10:45 AM
"Paweł Hajdan, Jr."
 
Default RFC: bugzilla flags for arch-testing

On 4/26/10 12:34 PM, Matti Bickel wrote:
> On 04/26/2010 11:40 AM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote:
>> To make it easier to find stabilization bugs with arch-testers'
>> comments, I'd like to add new flags to Gentoo bugzilla.
>
> Can you explain how the "TESTED" Keyword is not sufficient for your
> goal? It explicitly states: "Ebuilds that have been marked as tested by
> arch testers".

I'd like to narrow the search to x86 arch testers. We test independently
on each arch.

Paweł
 
Old 04-26-2010, 05:32 PM
"Robin H. Johnson"
 
Default RFC: bugzilla flags for arch-testing

On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 11:40:07AM +0200, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote:
> Also, I think it may be useful for other arch teams (like amd64). One
> solution would be to add yet another flag, like amd64-at, but maybe we
> can have some better ideas.
The problem here is that it becomes extremely messy when more and more
arches want the same functionality. 13 common arches, 3 fbsd arches, and
lots variations from the Prefix arches. This would take up a LOT of
screen space in Bugzilla unfortunately.

How about the following instead, going into the status whiteboard:
AT:x86:+
AT:x86:-
AT:x86:?
with the same meanings that you defined.

It should be just as easy to search, and you can do it today already.

--
Robin Hugh Johnson
Gentoo Linux: Developer, Trustee & Infrastructure Lead
E-Mail : robbat2@gentoo.org
GnuPG FP : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85
 
Old 04-26-2010, 06:36 PM
Christian Faulhammer
 
Default RFC: bugzilla flags for arch-testing

Hi,

"Robin H. Johnson" <robbat2@gentoo.org>:
> How about the following instead, going into the status whiteboard:
> AT:x86:+
> AT:x86:-
> AT:x86:?
> with the same meanings that you defined.
>
> It should be just as easy to search, and you can do it today already.

Yes, sounds good. What is the best way to document it apart from the
various AT FAQs?

V-Li

--
Christian Faulhammer, Gentoo Lisp project
<URL:http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/lisp/>, #gentoo-lisp on FreeNode

<URL:http://gentoo.faulhammer.org/>
 
Old 04-27-2010, 04:41 AM
Ryan Hill
 
Default RFC: bugzilla flags for arch-testing

On Mon, 26 Apr 2010 11:40:07 +0200
"Paweł Hajdan, Jr." <phajdan.jr@gentoo.org> wrote:

> After a consensus is reached, I'm going to file a bug for infra for
> necessary changes in bugzilla configuration.


https://bugs.gentoo.org/213514


--
fonts, by design, by neglect
gcc-porting, for a fact or just for effect
wxwidgets @ gentoo EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 08:03 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org