Re: [Savannah-hackers] Re: commit-grub mailinglist

[Sylvain Beucler]

On 2004.08.08 02:27 Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote:
> [Cc: to savannah-hackers]
>
> On Saturday 07 August 2004 15:45, Marco Gerards wrote:
> > A while ago we talked fixing the grub-commit mailinglist.  If I
> > remember correctly you also wanted to see this fixed.  I have asked
> > Jeff Bailey if he could do that for us.
> >
> > He contacted the savannah hackers for us (and for some other
> projects
> > as well).  The savannah hackers just don't want to fix this until
> the
> > GRUB maintainer (I assume that is only you) acknowledges he wants to
> > see it fixed.
> >
> > So can you please contact savannah-hackers if you want to see this
> > fixed?
>
> Sure, but that sounds a strange policy to me. Why do savannah hackers
> need a confirmation of a bug report, even though the presence of the
> bug is obvious? I really don't understand the policy of Savannah well.
>
> Savannah hackers: Could you give me a description about your policy?
> Don't you fix a bug if any GNU maintainer does not say that the bug is
> important?

Of course not.

I see things this way: Jeff Bailey asked to enable commit notifications 
for 2 projects he is administrator of, plus GRUB. As I have no trace of 
pre-december CVSROOTs, I do not know whether it was previously set-up 
or not, so I consider this is an enhancement, not a bug. And as Jeff 
Bailey is not administrator of GRUB, I asked confirmation from Okuji 
(the only 'policy' here is that I do not make changes to a project 
unless one of its administrator tells me to do so).

My original reply is there:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/savannah-hackers/2004-08/msg00119.html

Unfortunately, I didn't make it clear that I wanted a confirmation from 
the GRUB maintainer for project GRUB *only*.
The other repository were not modified straight away since I wanted to 
know whether they wanted diffs sent (in addition to commit 
notifications) or not.

Incidentally, Elfyn and I worked at the same time on this issue, and 
Elfyn set up the commit notification directly, which in this case was 
better.

Hoping things are clearer now :)

--
Sylvain