spock at evansville.net
Tue Oct 26 00:22:58 CEST 2010
On Mon, 25 Oct 2010, Michael Scherer wrote:
> Le lundi 25 octobre 2010 à 18:24 +0200, Wolfgang Bornath a écrit :
>> 2010/10/25 Michael Scherer <misc at zarb.org>:
>>> Le lundi 25 octobre 2010 à 11:37 -0400, andre999 a écrit :
>>>> Exactly. I'm getting more and more the sense that there should be a
>>>> separate bugzilla section for documentation, which would include
>>>> packaging descriptions.
>>> Ie, a separate section ?
>>> What would it achieve that the current bugzilla system would not ?
>> I don't think it would help. There is (was) the tag "Doc" (or similar)
>> in Bugzilla which already marked the bug as something related to
>> documentation. Somebody who is concerned and ignored that would also
>> ignore a separate section and vice versa.
>> I like a more general approach involving the users and packagers likewise:
>> - see a lack of or bad description in the "Individual package
>> selection and/or rpmdrake
>> - report it as a bug, giving the necessary explanation (in an ideal
>> world offer a good description yourself)
>> - triage team dedicates the bug to either the packager or the
>> developper who inserts the description in the installer.
> I would even add a tag on it, for junior job, or something like that. Ie
> small changes that can be done by newer packagers, just to learn how to
> change a package without requiring specific technical skills.
Funny you should say that. I was thinking along similar lines, that new
packagers could do some of the small, simple stuff to get experience AND
reduce the load on experienced packagers. I hope this gets implemented.
I'd be interested (albeit with some trepidation) in being a "junior
packager" myself. Having apprentices, who do a lot of the simple stuff,
is in my opinion the way to go.
More information about the Mageia-discuss