'Re: cleaning up of b.k.o.: policy for apps orphaned long ago'

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-devel
Subject:    Re: cleaning up of b.k.o.: policy for apps orphaned long ago
From:       Michael Pyne <mpyne () purinchu ! net>
Date:       2008-08-05 4:21:41
Message-ID: 200808050021.48430.mpyne () purinchu ! net
[Download RAW message or body]

[Attachment #2 (multipart/signed)]

[Attachment #4 (multipart/alternative)]

On Monday 04 August 2008, Aaron J. Seigo wrote:
> i still don't see the point of having a bug from 1998 on an app that is
> still waiting to be ported to kde3 while we work on kde 4.2 in 2008. =)
> maybe someone can explain the value to me? (i think i've described at least
> some of the costs in my last email.)
>
> in this particular case, kvidmode and mp3kult have zero bugs associated
> with them[1] and so i really don't see the controversy in deleting them =)

I don't think we should retain old bugs either but can they actually be 
deleted?  I thought they could basically only be marked as 
RESOLVED/FIXED/SOMETHING with hackery in the DB itself.  Assuming that's the 
case we shouldn't remove the product names or components unless we know that 
the individual bugs will remember the product name?

(i.e. do bug entries refer to the product name or copy it over in the table of 
bugs?)

Regards,
 - Michael Pyne

[Attachment #7 (text/html)]

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0//EN" \
"http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/strict.dtd"><html><head><meta name="qrichtext" \
content="1" /><style type="text/css">p, li { white-space: pre-wrap; \
}</style></head><body style=" font-family:'Consolas'; font-size:11pt; \
font-weight:400; font-style:normal;">On Monday 04 August 2008, Aaron J. Seigo \
wrote:<br> &gt; i still don't see the point of having a bug from 1998 on an app that \
is<br> &gt; still waiting to be ported to kde3 while we work on kde 4.2 in 2008. \
=)<br> &gt; maybe someone can explain the value to me? (i think i've described at \
least<br> &gt; some of the costs in my last email.)<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; in this particular case, kvidmode and mp3kult have zero bugs associated<br>
&gt; with them[1] and so i really don't see the controversy in deleting them =)<br>
<p style="-qt-paragraph-type:empty; margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; \
margin-left:0px; margin-right:0px; -qt-block-indent:0; text-indent:0px; \
-qt-user-state:0;"></p>I don't think we should retain old bugs either but can they \
actually be deleted?  I thought they could basically only be marked as \
RESOLVED/FIXED/SOMETHING with hackery in the DB itself.  Assuming that's the case we \
shouldn't remove the product names or components unless we know that the individual \
bugs will remember the product name?<br> <p style="-qt-paragraph-type:empty; \
margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; margin-left:0px; margin-right:0px; \
-qt-block-indent:0; text-indent:0px; -qt-user-state:0;"></p>(i.e. do bug entries \
refer to the product name or copy it over in the table of bugs?)<br> <p \
style="-qt-paragraph-type:empty; margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; margin-left:0px; \
margin-right:0px; -qt-block-indent:0; text-indent:0px; \
                -qt-user-state:0;"></p>Regards,<br>
 - Michael Pyne</p></body></html>

["signature.asc" (application/pgp-signature)]

>> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 