bloodhound-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gary Martin <>
Subject Re: Abandoned tickets
Date Tue, 18 Dec 2012 16:37:39 GMT
On 18/12/12 13:13, Joachim Dreimann wrote:
> On 18 December 2012 08:32, Peter Koželj <> wrote:
>> Agree, it seems this has been addressed at least partly.
>> I have also decreased priority for #151.
>> What remains is:
>> o #256: AFAICT this should be closed and a new normal priority ticket
>> opened?
> I don't know, what action is even left? As I understood Greg's comment on
> the mailing list we don't need to remove minified Trac files.

OK, I'll look at that again and I expect to close it.

>> o #273: Waiting for Trac ML?
>> o #308: Not assigned!
> As I understand Ryan's latest comment this doesn't require any further
> action from us other than importing trac 1.0.1 in the future

Or we can patch our copy of trac if that does not appear likely to 
happen in a timely manner.

>> o #156: Waiting for Apache Infra, does this really deserve "critical"
>> priority?
> I would argue that yes, it's critical for improving our development
> environment. It's also worrying that we haven't had movement on this in
> four months, and the ticket is almost six months old.
> I've brought this up in the #asfinfra channel today, see below:
> 12:45 pctony: jdreimann: it is something we can do yes, but it is now
> blocked on the storage I am trying to fix right now.
> 12:52 pctony: Sorry.
> 12:53 jdreimann: pctony: That's okay, I'm really just hoping to get this
> moving again since we've made no progress in so long.
> 12:53 pctony: jdreimann: we will as soon as I sort the storage
> This may make progress soon, although he's struggling with a FreeNAS
> upgrade at the moment (the storage he referred to).

Thanks for that Joe. As far as I am concerned this is very important for 
us. I guess you don't know what you are missing if you are not used to 
it being there. For a start, all the r[commit number] comments in 
tickets will spring into usefulness. Getting the repository browser in 
everyday use will also begin to feed back into improvements we can make 
to it.

>> o #279: Not assigned!
> Classed as a starter tickets. Should we make a decision to not class
> critical/blocker issues starter tickets? Maybe that gets it some attention
> sooner.

I have no particular problem with critical or blocker status being given 
the starter keyword. It shouldn't stop people from looking at the ticket 
if it interests them and it should be fixed by the next release.

>> o #291: Not assigned!
> o #293: Assigned to Gary as I have questions for him. Is this really
>> "critical"?
> Gary as replied it seems.

I won't complain about anyone reducing the priority of that ticket. It 
is not critical in the sense of breaking anything but I was expecting a 
quick little patch for the basic issue and then possibly a new low 
priority ticket for any proper enhancements.


View raw message