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

Re: Re: Include justification in tagging bugs ‘$FOO-ignore’

Filipus Klutiero <chealer@gmail.com> writes:

> > In other words, if a tag indicates a special case, that special case
> > should be justified with a specific explanation.
> >
> > I would like to see such justification expected for every such tag,
> > enforced by the convention that tags with *no* justification provided
> > can be summarily removed by anyone. This would place the burden of
> > argument in the correct place, as I see it, while not needing anything
> > as heavy-handed as a policy requirement.
> >
> > Is that feasible? Is it reasonable?
> > > Anyone can certainly remove the tag, but I don't think it's a good
> idea that such a tag be removed without the release team's approval.

Notice that I only advocate removing the tag when it's not accompanied
by a clear, explicit justification.
I'm advancing something wider than this, but it also covers the case you brought up.
> I see these tags as being for the release team's use

I disagree; the ‘foo-ignore’ bug tags have an explicit mechanical
effect on how the corresponding package will be treated by the tools.
Which tools? I can think of britney, which is already under the release team's control anyway.
> hence the team should determine by itself whether these tags should
> be applied.

All I propose is that the ‘foo-ignore’ tags by themselves communicate
nothing to the (human) reader about why this particular bug is
special-cased, and that without an explicit justification accompanying
the tag it should be removed by anyone who finds it in that state.
Yes...and all I was saying is that I don't think your proposal is a good idea.

Reply to: