[fab] JBJ considered harmfull

[Max Spevack]

On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Christopher Blizzard wrote:

> Do we really want to wait that long?

I was hoping it would be done by now, and that it wouldn't be a long wait.  
The purpose of what Bill and Will were talking about doing was stopping 
non-Fedora maintainers or QA folks, basically, from closing Fedora bugs, 
which is a major problem with what JBJ is doing.

>From an engineering perspective, is that going to take a long time?

--Max

> Max Spevack wrote:
> > On Mon, 7 Aug 2006, Rex Dieter wrote:
> > 
> > > Jesse Keating wrote:
> > > > Yet another case of JBJ being offensive:
> > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=143301 Can we
> > > > please revoke his access to Fedora bugs?
> > 
> > Wow, those comments...
> > 
> > > I think(*) the consensus (of the Board) was that this would likely
> > > happen, but only after another "upstream" bugzilla (besides
> > > bugzilla.redhat.com) was established for rpm.
> > >
> > > -- Rex
> > >
> > > (*) Hopefully I'm not putting words in others' mouths, please speak up
> > > otherwise.  (:
> > 
> > That's accurate.  notting and wwoods were going to do some work on solving
> > the issue of bug groups, etc.
> > 
> > Where are we with that?
> > 
> > --Max
> > 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> fedora-advisory-board mailing list
> fedora-advisory-board at redhat.com
> http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
> 
> 

-- 
Max Spevack
+ http://spevack.org
+ gpg key -- http://spevack.org/max.asc
+ fingerprint -- CD52 5E72 369B B00D 9E9A 773E 2FDB CB46 5A17 CF21