[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: bodhi 0.4.10 features



Tom Lane <tgl redhat com> wrote:
> "Jon Stanley" <jonstanley gmail com> writes:
> > On Jan 27, 2008 11:26 PM, Luke Macken <lmacken redhat com> wrote:
> >> Sorry for the confusion.  Jon's proposal[0] was approved at the last FESCo
> >> meeting, but it doesn't specify what to close the bugs as.  John
> >> Poelstra's bug workflow[1] page illustrates Jon's proposal, but specifies
> >> that bugs be closed as RAWHIDE.
> 
> > I'm not sure what the purpose of RAWHIDE here is....it's obviously not
> > rawhide by the time that it hits stable.
> 
> One other point here, if I haven't worn out my welcome.  The
> previously-cited page defining bug closure states says that RAWHIDE
> "should not be used for RHEL bugs", but that is obviously a RHEL-centric
> definition.  I argue that in the context of Fedora, RAWHIDE should only
> be used to close bugs filed against the current development version (ie,
> rawhide) that don't exist in any released version.  If a bug has gotten
> into a release branch then it should get closed as ERRATA or
> CURRENTRELEASE, as appropriate.

To simplify things, if the current release for the package fixes the bug,
CURRENTRELEASE. Doen't matter if the package is in F<X> or rawhide.
-- 
Dr. Horst H. von Brand                   User #22616 counter.li.org
Departamento de Informatica                    Fono: +56 32 2654431
Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria             +56 32 2654239
Casilla 110-V, Valparaiso, Chile               Fax:  +56 32 2797513


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]