On 04/25/2017 01:54 PM, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: >>>>>> "KF" == Kevin Fenzi <kevin@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > [Using foo-owner@fp.o as the default owner for bugs] > KF> But also disadvantages of people liking to see a name they can point > KF> to about the package or know who is cc'ed on the bug. > > For years I've wondered why we don't do that, honestly. But I think it > might be weird that bugzilla separates the owner of a package from the > owner of a bug, and some of the interactions might be non-obvious. Yeah. > When I take a bug, will the other maintainers still be notified? Will > bugzilla send mail to foo-owner as well as CC'ing the maintainers, so > that everyone gets each message twice? Yeah, if we made the default foo-owner and cc foo-owner, then when you took a bug, everyone would get a email because foo-owner is on there as cc, but you might get two (one for you and one via foo owner) > > Will someone be able to log into bugzilla as foo-owner? no. > What happens to bugs marked as private? If they're private to foo-owner > then how will the actual maintainers see them? Package maintainers would still need to be added to the right groups so they could see private bugs. (fedora_contrib_private I think it is). kevin
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ infrastructure mailing list -- infrastructure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to infrastructure-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
