On Dienstag 20 Februar 2007, Warren Togami wrote: > Ville Skyttä wrote: > > On Monday 19 February 2007, Warren Togami wrote: > >> More Branches on Existing Packages > >> ================================== > >> 1) Use existing review ticket, even if it is CLOSED, this is fine. > > > > Reusing an old review ticket results in additional traffic on the reviews > > mailing list that most recipients probably don't care about and would > > rather not receive... > > Somebody asking to change the owner of a package shouldn't be visible to > everyone else? I believe it should. Why not keep sending it to fedora-extras-commits@xxxxxxxxxx like it was done before and also notify the previous owner/comaintainers and e-mail address in case of changes? Why are changes to owners.list not sent to fedora-extras-commits@xxxxxxxxxx anymore? > Even if this not ideal, this sucks a LOT less than the previous process. > Using the Wiki for workflow management was just horrible. Separate > authentication system, poor tracking of who did what, completely > decoupled from the Bugzilla tickets they were referring to, requiring > more work in reading context before approving a request. We will NOT > move back to using the Wiki for a purpose like that. When you want to use Bugzilla, why not create a Product "CVS Staff" with the same Components (Packages) as Extras/Core and manage CVS requests there? Then you have everything you need but do not need to add unrelated information to the review tickets. Afaics you do not even need flags anymore because the CVS staff can query for new tickets, to see what needs to be done. Regards, Till
Attachment:
pgpFZR3lv89rU.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- Fedora-maintainers mailing list Fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers
-- Fedora-maintainers-readonly mailing list Fedora-maintainers-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers-readonly
