GNOME.org
 

Re: [gitg] proposal: recategorize or close all bugs for old gitg

I think I am mostly done!

These are the stats:

https://bugzilla.gnome.org/buglist.cgi?type0-0-4=substring;emaillongdesc1=1;field0-0-0=product;type0-0-1=substring;field0-0-1=component;resolution=FIXED;resolution=WONTFIX;resolution=DUPLICATE;resolution=NOTABUG;resolution=NOTGNOME;resolution=INCOMPLETE;resolution=INVALID;resolution=OBSOLETE;field0-0-4=longdesc;emailtype1=substring;chfieldto=Now;chfield=[Bug%20creation];chfield=alias;chfield=assigned_to;chfield=cclist_accessible;chfield=component;chfield=deadline;chfield=emblems;chfield=everconfirmed;chfield=externalcc;chfield=cf_gnome_target;chfield=cf_gnome_version;chfield=keywords;chfield=op_sys_details;chfield=op_sys;chfield=rep_platform;chfield=priority;chfield=product;chfield=qa_contact;chfield=reporter_accessible;chfield=resolution;chfield=bug_severity;chfield=bug_status;chfield=short_desc;chfield=target_milestone;chfield=bug_file_loc;chfield=version;chfield=version_details;chfield=votes;chfield=status_whiteboard;query_format=advanced;type0-0-3=substring;field0-0-3=status_whiteboard;chfieldfrom=2013-06-09;bug_status=UNCONFIRMED;bug_status=NEW;bug_status=ASSIGNED;bug_status=REOPENED;bug_status=NEEDINFO;bug_status=RESOLVED;bug_status=VERIFIED;field0-0-2=short_desc;email1=sindhus%40live.in;type0-0-0=substring;product=gitg;type0-0-2=substring

I've left the enhancements, memory and performance bug alone.
I have tried to reproduce all bug reports against current git master and then given the resolution.

Thanks.



On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 2:37 PM, Sindhu S <sindhus live in> wrote:
Hi

Sorry it took me awhile to take the first step. I realised today that I don't have the rights to create a  new component for our gitg project bugpage and hence have filed a bug requested for 'gitg-0.x' to transfer all bugs related to C-version of gitg that are left over from filtering those that are valid/present for vala version and wishlist-features.

https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=701991


On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 10:22 AM, Sindhu S <sindhus live in> wrote:
Aite, attempting this today.

On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 5:00 AM, Adam Dingle <adam medovina org> wrote:
Jesse's proposal sounds reasonable to me.

adam


On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 3:14 PM, Sindhu S <sindhu oxf gmail com> wrote:
Aye!
I agree with the suggested measures. Nacho and adam? Confirm please.

Thanks.
Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone.
From: Jesse van den Kieboom <jessevdk gnome org>
Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2013 19:49:15 +0200
To: Sindhu S<sindhus live in>
Cc: Adam Dingle<adam medovina org>; gitg-list<gitg-list gnome org>
Subject: Re: [gitg] proposal: recategorize or close all bugs for old gitg

My take on this. I think we can move all the current bugzilla reports related to the C version of gitg  to a new component. Maybe call it gitg-0.x or something like that. If there are any bugs which specifically relate to bugs that are no longer present/valid for the vala version, then those can be closed. However, if they relate to things like not-yet-implemented features, then we should keep them and close them whenever it's implemented in the new gitg.



2013/5/31 Sindhu S <sindhus live in>
I am waiting on an OK for this. Please confirm and let me know what bugs you wanted re-categorized/closed/tested to confirm behaviour in master and so on. 

Thanks.


On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 11:45 PM, Sindhu S <sindhus live in> wrote:
I can do it, as I have both the time and the special permissions required on bugzilla.


On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 11:42 PM, Adam Dingle <adam medovina org> wrote:
OK, great.  Should we move these bugs to a separate component, or just close them?

Do you want to close out these bugs, or should I?  (I would need permissions to change the status of arbitrary bugs in gitg - I can't do that now.)

adam


On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 1:26 PM, Ignacio Casal Quinteiro <nacho resa gmail com> wrote:
Hey Adam,

both things look good to me.


On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 4:39 PM, Adam Dingle <adam medovina org> wrote:
Bugzilla currently contains lots of bugs that apply only to the old gitg implementation written in C.  The new implementation in Vala in git master is the future and is the only version under development.  This is confusing at best, so I propose that we either (a) move all bugs for the old gitg into a separate Bugzilla component, e.g. 'old-gitg', or (b) simply close these bugs, marking them INVALID or WONTFIX.  What do you gitg developers think?

adam

_______________________________________________
gitg-list mailing list
gitg-list gnome org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gitg-list




--
Ignacio Casal Quinteiro

_______________________________________________
gitg-list mailing list
gitg-list gnome org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gitg-list




_______________________________________________
gitg-list mailing list
gitg-list gnome org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gitg-list





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