Re: [fedora-java] java group
On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 12:28 PM, Colin Walters <walters(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On Fri, 2008-05-09 at 14:03 -0400, Andrew Overholt wrote:
> * Stephen John Smoogen <smooge(a)gmail.com> [2008-05-09 13:53]:
> > On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 11:30 AM, Colin Walters <walters(a)redhat.com>
wrote:
> > > What would you guys think about having a subset of Java packages be
> > > owned by a Java group?
>
> Tom Fitzsimmons was going to start a Java SIG. Perhaps this can tie in
> with that?
Yeah, that makes sense.
> > > [...]
> >
> > I think that would help with coverage of issues. The main problem is
> > making sure that someone is taking ownership of a problem in the group
> > so that something does not just get 'oh I thought Colin was working on
> > it?'
>
> Yeah, that's my only issue as well. And it annoys me when I file a bug
> and see it go to xdg-maint(a)redhat.com or something since there's no
> guarantee anyone's watching that alias.
That is a valid concern - however, since Fedora is in general a
community project, there's no guarantee that a bug will get a response
even if it's assigned to an actual person.
s/in general a community//
I have had more than my share of RH bugs that sat in UNASSIGNED for a
long time :).. and I worked there at the time. :)
As for knowing that someone's working on a bug - Bugzilla
provides a
mechanism for someone to take ownership of a bug (change state to
ASSIGNED, reassign to your email address).
I think in practice, having more people see issues and work on them
collectively will work out better than individual fiefdoms.
That is true... as long as the workflow is clear.
--
Stephen J Smoogen. -- BSD/GNU/Linux
How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed
in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice"