You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openoffice.apache.org by "Dennis E. Hamilton" <or...@apache.org> on 2013/01/18 23:52:21 UTC
Assigning Issues to the issues List?
I just noticed these changes on issues to clear out old bug assignees. I recall a bunch of mystery e-mails being used and now I see issues@ openoffice.apache.org.
That's odd, since that is a mailing list. It is the mailing list that all bugzilla issues and issue updates are reported to. It is automatically CC'd by bugzilla. It's atom feed can be subscribed to also: <http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/openoffice-issues/?format=atom>.
So I think issues@ o.a.o is not someone who can do anything, including being assigned a bug? And the subscribers to issues@ o.a.o already receive information about such an issue.
I suppose that this is a reasonable way to notify folks that the issue is unclaimed, although a none or no-one assignee might work better.
- Dennis
-----Original Message-----
From: bugzilla@apache.org [mailto:bugzilla@apache.org]
Sent: Friday, January 18, 2013 11:40
To: issues@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: [Bug 92373] PPT import/export of media events
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=92373
Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assignee|sven.jacobi@oracle.com |issues@openoffice.apache.or
| |g
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
Re: Assigning Issues to the issues List?
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 12:03 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
<de...@acm.org> wrote:
> My impression is that addition of issues@ o.a.o to the CC list is automatic. But maybe that is only for new issues since the move to Apache bugzilla. In that case, it makes sense to clean up old ones that way.
>
Exactly. Every "product" has one or more "components". For example,
the spreadsheet product has the following components:
code
configuration
editing
formatting
open-import
printing
programming
save-export
ui
And each component then has "default assignee" and a "default cc
list". We have them both set to "issues@openoffice.apache.org" for
all products and components. But the legacy project did fine-grained
default assignments to various product-specific mailing lists.
The "default assignee" field must be set. But the "default cc list"
is optional.
-Rob
> - Dennis
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Oliver-Rainer Wittmann [mailto:orwittmann@googlemail.com]
> Sent: Monday, January 21, 2013 08:26
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Assigning Issues to the issues List?
>
> Hi,
>
>
> Am 18.01.2013 um 23:52 schrieb "Dennis E. Hamilton" <or...@apache.org>:
>
>> I just noticed these changes on issues to clear out old bug assignees. I recall a bunch of mystery e-mails being used and now I see issues@ openoffice.apache.org.
>>
>> That's odd, since that is a mailing list. It is the mailing list that all bugzilla issues and issue updates are reported to. It is automatically CC'd by bugzilla. It's atom feed can be subscribed to also: <http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/openoffice-issues/?format=atom>.
>
> I had figured out together with Herbert some month ago that issues@o.a.o is not automatically CC'd - it has to be on the CC list or the assignee of the issue.
>
> Best Regards, Oliver.
>
>>
>> So I think issues@ o.a.o is not someone who can do anything, including being assigned a bug? And the subscribers to issues@ o.a.o already receive information about such an issue.
>>
>> I suppose that this is a reasonable way to notify folks that the issue is unclaimed, although a none or no-one assignee might work better.
>>
>> - Dennis
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: bugzilla@apache.org [mailto:bugzilla@apache.org]
>> Sent: Friday, January 18, 2013 11:40
>> To: issues@openoffice.apache.org
>> Subject: [Bug 92373] PPT import/export of media events
>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=92373
>>
>> Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> changed:
>>
>> What |Removed |Added
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Assignee|sven.jacobi@oracle.com |issues@openoffice.apache.or
>> | |g
>>
>> --
>> You are receiving this mail because:
>> You are on the CC list for the bug.
>> You are the assignee for the bug.
>>
>
RE: Assigning Issues to the issues List?
Posted by "Dennis E. Hamilton" <de...@acm.org>.
My impression is that addition of issues@ o.a.o to the CC list is automatic. But maybe that is only for new issues since the move to Apache bugzilla. In that case, it makes sense to clean up old ones that way.
- Dennis
-----Original Message-----
From: Oliver-Rainer Wittmann [mailto:orwittmann@googlemail.com]
Sent: Monday, January 21, 2013 08:26
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: Assigning Issues to the issues List?
Hi,
Am 18.01.2013 um 23:52 schrieb "Dennis E. Hamilton" <or...@apache.org>:
> I just noticed these changes on issues to clear out old bug assignees. I recall a bunch of mystery e-mails being used and now I see issues@ openoffice.apache.org.
>
> That's odd, since that is a mailing list. It is the mailing list that all bugzilla issues and issue updates are reported to. It is automatically CC'd by bugzilla. It's atom feed can be subscribed to also: <http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/openoffice-issues/?format=atom>.
I had figured out together with Herbert some month ago that issues@o.a.o is not automatically CC'd - it has to be on the CC list or the assignee of the issue.
Best Regards, Oliver.
>
> So I think issues@ o.a.o is not someone who can do anything, including being assigned a bug? And the subscribers to issues@ o.a.o already receive information about such an issue.
>
> I suppose that this is a reasonable way to notify folks that the issue is unclaimed, although a none or no-one assignee might work better.
>
> - Dennis
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: bugzilla@apache.org [mailto:bugzilla@apache.org]
> Sent: Friday, January 18, 2013 11:40
> To: issues@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: [Bug 92373] PPT import/export of media events
>
> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=92373
>
> Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> changed:
>
> What |Removed |Added
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Assignee|sven.jacobi@oracle.com |issues@openoffice.apache.or
> | |g
>
> --
> You are receiving this mail because:
> You are on the CC list for the bug.
> You are the assignee for the bug.
>
Re: Assigning Issues to the issues List?
Posted by Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <or...@googlemail.com>.
Hi,
Am 18.01.2013 um 23:52 schrieb "Dennis E. Hamilton" <or...@apache.org>:
> I just noticed these changes on issues to clear out old bug assignees. I recall a bunch of mystery e-mails being used and now I see issues@ openoffice.apache.org.
>
> That's odd, since that is a mailing list. It is the mailing list that all bugzilla issues and issue updates are reported to. It is automatically CC'd by bugzilla. It's atom feed can be subscribed to also: <http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/openoffice-issues/?format=atom>.
I had figured out together with Herbert some month ago that issues@o.a.o is not automatically CC'd - it has to be on the CC list or the assignee of the issue.
Best Regards, Oliver.
>
> So I think issues@ o.a.o is not someone who can do anything, including being assigned a bug? And the subscribers to issues@ o.a.o already receive information about such an issue.
>
> I suppose that this is a reasonable way to notify folks that the issue is unclaimed, although a none or no-one assignee might work better.
>
> - Dennis
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: bugzilla@apache.org [mailto:bugzilla@apache.org]
> Sent: Friday, January 18, 2013 11:40
> To: issues@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: [Bug 92373] PPT import/export of media events
>
> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=92373
>
> Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> changed:
>
> What |Removed |Added
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Assignee|sven.jacobi@oracle.com |issues@openoffice.apache.or
> | |g
>
> --
> You are receiving this mail because:
> You are on the CC list for the bug.
> You are the assignee for the bug.
>
Re: Assigning Issues to the issues List?
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 5:52 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton <or...@apache.org> wrote:
> I just noticed these changes on issues to clear out old bug assignees. I recall a bunch of mystery e-mails being used and now I see issues@ openoffice.apache.org.
>
> That's odd, since that is a mailing list. It is the mailing list that all bugzilla issues and issue updates are reported to. It is automatically CC'd by bugzilla. It's atom feed can be subscribed to also: <http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/openoffice-issues/?format=atom>.
>
> So I think issues@ o.a.o is not someone who can do anything, including being assigned a bug? And the subscribers to issues@ o.a.o already receive information about such an issue.
>
> I suppose that this is a reasonable way to notify folks that the issue is unclaimed, although a none or no-one assignee might work better.
>
Assigning it to the list is how we indicate a "null" assignment. It
doesn't seem possible to have the assignment field be blank.
What I did (and sorry for the noise) is reset bugs previously assigned
to *.oracle.com, since these are obviously not being worked on now.
This is prep to get ready for a call for developers.
-Rob
-Rob
> - Dennis
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: bugzilla@apache.org [mailto:bugzilla@apache.org]
> Sent: Friday, January 18, 2013 11:40
> To: issues@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: [Bug 92373] PPT import/export of media events
>
> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=92373
>
> Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> changed:
>
> What |Removed |Added
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Assignee|sven.jacobi@oracle.com |issues@openoffice.apache.or
> | |g
>
> --
> You are receiving this mail because:
> You are on the CC list for the bug.
> You are the assignee for the bug.
>