On Fri, Aug 04, 2006 at 07:31:53PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > >> That might be a good idea, or a blocker bug. How do we make sure that > >> not too many or too obscure bugs get set to this keyword / blockerbug? > >> Just remove abusing bugs? > > Yeah, although we'd have to carefully pick the keyword so as to not offend > > someone if *their* pet peeve bug got removed. > I must say I'm more in favor of a blocker bug (since I'm unfamiliar with > the use of keywords) I'm not sure a blocker bug is really appropriate, as by definition it's unlikely all the dependencies will ever be resolved. Keywords are really trivial. -- Matthew Miller mattdm@xxxxxxxxxx <http://mattdm.org/> Boston University Linux ------> <http://linux.bu.edu/> -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
