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


 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 02-01-2008, 06:12 PM
James Westby
 
Default No Attention

On Thu, 2008-01-31 at 07:26 +0100, Daniel Holbach wrote:
> Am Montag, den 28.01.2008, 22:09 +0000 schrieb James Westby:
> > There seem to be some false positives in here, for instance #183615.
> > Is this a bug in the launchpad bug search that you use do you think?
>
> Seems that http://launchpadlibrarian.net/11413037/foo.txt on
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-utils/+bug/183615 had
> the 'patch tag' on, I'm sure that others do too.

Ah, thanks for the clarification. I'm intrigued how you knew that
it was that file.

Also, does anyone know why setting the checkbox doesn't translate
in to an actual patch tag? (at least that I could see). It seems
to me that this would make it more discoverable, and also allow us
to remove the tag in cases like this, or where the patch isn't
satisfactory.

Thanks,

James


--
ubuntu-devel mailing list
ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
 
Old 02-04-2008, 12:26 PM
"Emmet Hikory"
 
Default No Attention

James Westby wrote:
> Ah, thanks for the clarification. I'm intrigued how you knew that
> it was that file.

The "edit" link for attachments shows whether the attachment has the
patch flag set. There are several bugs against launchpad that ask for
a better interface, my favorite being 123915 (1). A more
comprehensive list is available by searching (2).

> Also, does anyone know why setting the checkbox doesn't translate
> in to an actual patch tag? (at least that I could see). It seems
> to me that this would make it more discoverable, and also allow us
> to remove the tag in cases like this, or where the patch isn't
> satisfactory.

There was a thread (3) about this in November, where various uses were
described, of both the "patch" tag and the attachment patch flag.
Depending on how people intend to use them, they may be semantically
different, as there might be something that is a patch and doesn't
have an attachment, or something that is not a solution to the bug,
but is nonetheless an attached patch file (perhaps representing part
of the solution). This is further complicated by the interaction
between LP hosted BZR branches and bug reports, where a given branch
may contain a fix, yet not be a "patch" in either the tag or
attachment flag sense.

What is needed is the development of some consensus as to the
preferred workflow when dealing with presented patches that are not
sponsorship requests. As this affects all of Ubuntu workflows,
Launchpad interfaces, and likely workflows of other projects using
Launchpad, it may be best developed with a blueprint for discussion at
a Development Summit.

1: https://bugs.launchpad.net/malone/+bug/123915
2: https://launchpad.net/malone/+bugs?field.searchtext=patch
3: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/2007-November/024790.html

--
Emmet HIKORY

--
ubuntu-devel mailing list
ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 06:36 PM.

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