On Tue, 08 Apr 2008 02:49:02 -0700, Andrew Farris wrote: > Michael Schwendt wrote: > > On Tue, 08 Apr 2008 00:31:39 -0700, Andrew Farris wrote: > > > >> Michael Schwendt wrote: > >>> fail to see the guarantee that this time a report will be dealt with. All > >>> I see is that tickets were picked by age/by product and not by contents. > >> Waiting on the magic perl script that can do that, or the offer to have looked > >> at the thousands of bugs manually instead of the script, now that would be > >> productive and helpful. > > > > If you don't filter by package name, there will always be thousands > > of bugs. > > I meant the thousands of bugs relevant to this discussion... filed as rawhide > during an EOL release development cycle. I'm suggesting that although in a > perfect world a content parser would know how to deal with the bug (which you > keep suggesting should have been used) its just not available. A heuristic had > to be applied, the triagers applied one in a best effort plan to correct the > problem that was being created over a few years. I'm leaving it to you to > suggest an actual method of picking bug tickets by contents which is > implementable without manual human interaction on every single one of them. And you still don't want to understand. That's why you try to make a smart-ass post that fails to comment on the problem. There are only a few packages with hundreds or thousands of bugs each. They make up the big pile of bugs that ask for automation -- the thousands of bugs you consider relevant. That doesn't mean you've got to touch all other packages, too, and auto-close their tickets in an automated way. You only do this if you don't care about bugs at all, if you are annoyed that users submit problem reports and expect you to evaluate them. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
