Re: Bugzilla summary

[Telsa Gwynne <hobbit aloss ukuu org uk>]

On Mon, Nov 20, 2000 at 04:37:25PM -0500 or thereabouts, Russell Steinthal wrote:
> On 20 Nov 2000 15:48:14 +0100, Martin Baulig wrote:
> 
> >Hi guys,
> >
> >so I'm trying to do some summary on the Bugzilla installation:
> 
> First, thanks for your work on the Bugzilla project- other than what 

Echoed.

> It would be useful to have a definition of NORMAL- I know that sounds 
> obvious, but I have this feeling that the line between MAJOR/NORMAL 
> will be problematic.

Agreed. 
 
> I still like NOTGNOME instead of, or at least in addition to, 
> INVALID.  It's a much "nicer" way of dealing with legitimate bug 
> reports from users who might just be confused.  I also noticed that 

Agreed: NOTGNOME is very clear. INVALID is less so and sounds more
like a brush-off ("You say it's a bug, I say it's a feature/designed
that way/a property of the library and can't be changed.") 

> >8.) Did I miss something

Two-fold: 

(a) what's going to happen to bugs.gnome.org? It will be around for
a few years but deprecated, and it will feed stuff into the new
Bugzilla?

(b) if the above is not the case (and I hope it is the case), provision
for (sorry, but I have to bring it up) emailed reports? People have
mentioned that Bugzilla has an email interface in its /contrib directory:
did you install it, or not? 

> >This Bugzilla stuff will result in a lot of work for me, so I'd like
> >to ask you to also tell me if you like this proposal and not only
> >if you disaggree with some points.

Everything I snipped I either didn't understand fully (I'll leave it
to others to argue about semantics of OS names) or agreed with. Thanks
a lot for the effort. I wish I were in a position to offer to do
something useful like actually implement email myself: I am very
conscious I am again sitting on the sidelines saying "I want" :) So
thanks. 

Telsa