[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#286792: marked as done (allow bugs to be forcibly merged with different severities/tags)

Your message dated Tue, 18 Apr 2006 16:36:29 -0700
with message-id <20060418233629.GD14053@volo.donarmstrong.com>
and subject line Blocks/Blocked-by bugs need to be blocked the same way
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere.  Please contact me immediately.)

Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)

--- Begin Message ---
Package: debbugs
Severity: wishlist

I propose a forcemerge command (or some better synonym) that would
merge bugs, using the first bug listed as a template for the changes
to be applied to the other bugs.

IE, if 1 and 2 were bugs with severity serious and important,
respectively, you could go:

forcemerge 1 2

instead of

severity 2 serious
merge 1 2

The converse would be:

forcemerge 2 1

instead of

severity 1 important
merge 1 2

[This would just help maintainers easily merge bugs without having to
worry about whatever random severity a submitter thought was
important, while keeping the traditional behavior for merge so
maintainers aren't caught unawares.]

Don Armstrong

I'd sign up in a hot second for any cellular company whose motto was:
"We're less horrible than a root canal with a cold chisel."
-- Cory Doctorow

http://www.donarmstrong.com              http://rzlab.ucr.edu

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Blocked bugs (and those blocked-by) need to be blocked in the same
way; otherwise merging them will produce an undefined state. Merging
the set of blocks isn't exactly obvious either.

The implementation of forcemerge will enable the second bug to take on
the exact same state as the first bug listed, but that's not yet fully
tested. As that bug already exists in multiple forms (see #14043 et
al.) I'm closing this bug.

Don Armstrong

The solution to a problem changes the problem.
 -- Peer's Law

http://www.donarmstrong.com              http://rzlab.ucr.edu

--- End Message ---

Reply to: