This message generated a parse failure. Raw output follows here. Please use 'back' to navigate. From devnull@lkml.org Thu Apr 18 05:00:35 2024 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.116.70.75]) by kylie.puddingonline.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gBM2r3o05432 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 03:53:03 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 21:43:14 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 21:43:14 -0500 Received: from smtp-outbound.cwctv.net ([213.104.18.10]:31067 "EHLO smtp.cwctv.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 21:43:13 -0500 Received: from cwctv.net ([172.16.33.42]) by smtp.cwctv.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.447.44); Sun, 22 Dec 2002 02:48:00 +0000 From: To: john@grabjohn.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 02:50:47 +0000 Subject: Re: Dedicated kernel bug database Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Liberate TVMail 2.6 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="1040525447999" Message-Id: <0725500480216c2DTVMAIL7@smtp.cwctv.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --1040525447999 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit What are your ideas??? Regards, Dean. On Fri, 20 Dec 2002 09:48:53 +0000 (GMT) John Bradford wrote: --1040525447999 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.116.70.75]) by smtp.cwctv.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.447.44); Fri, 20 Dec 2002 09:38:35 +0000 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 04:29:06 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 04:29:06 -0500 Received: from [81.2.122.30] ([81.2.122.30]:2564 "EHLO darkstar.example.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 04:29:05 -0500 Received: from darkstar.example.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by darkstar.example.net (8.12.4/8.12.4) with ESMTP id gBK9mrGE000327; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 09:48:53 GMT Received: (from root@localhost) by darkstar.example.net (8.12.4/8.12.4/Submit) id gBK9mrXh000326; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 09:48:53 GMT From: John Bradford Message-Id: <200212200948.gBK9mrXh000326@darkstar.example.net> Subject: Re: Dedicated kernel bug database To: mbligh@aracnet.com (Martin J. Bligh) Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 09:48:53 +0000 (GMT) Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <79780000.1040355621@titus> from "Martin J. Bligh" at Dec 19, 2002 07:40:22 PM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL6] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: linux-kernel-owner+Hell.Surfers=40cwctv.net@vger.kernel.org [CC list trimmed] > > I've got loads of ideas about how we could build a better bug database > > Go ahead, knock yourself out. Come back when you're done. Not sure what you mean. I do intend to start coding a new bug database system today, and I'll announce it on the list when it's ready. If nobody likes it, I wasted my time. > > - for example, we have categories at the moment in Bugzilla. Why? We > > already have a MAINTAINERS file, so say somebody looks up the relevant > > maintainer in that list, finds them, then goes to enter a bug in > > Bugzilla. Now they have to assign it to a category, and different > > people may well assign the same bug to different categories - > > immediately making duplicate detection more difficult. > > Have you actually looked at the maintainers file? Yes. > It's a twisted mess of outdated information, Then it should be updated, that is nothing to do with Bugzilla. > in no well formated order. Looks easy enough to parse with regular expressions to me. > The category list in Bugzilla was an attempt to bring some sanity to > the structure, By adding an extra layer of abstraction. I don't agree that that helps. > though I won't claim it's perfect. We really need a 3-level tree, > but that's a fair amount of work to code. I disagree, (that we need a 3-level tree). John. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ --1040525447999-- - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/