develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from July 2018

Re: [perl #132671] Bleadperl v5.27.6-206-g16ada235c3 breaksJGAMBLE/Algorithm-QuineMcCluskey-0.16.tar.gz

Thread Previous | Thread Next
From:
Sawyer X
Date:
July 1, 2018 01:21
Subject:
Re: [perl #132671] Bleadperl v5.27.6-206-g16ada235c3 breaksJGAMBLE/Algorithm-QuineMcCluskey-0.16.tar.gz
Message ID:
19183_1530408065_5B382C81_19183_100_1_71a385c1-dabc-d385-dedb-cbf59cffc1d9@gmail.com


On 06/10/2018 08:27 PM, slaven@rezic.de via RT wrote:
> Dana Sun, 10 Jun 2018 08:54:06 -0700, public@khwilliamson.com reče:
>> On 06/10/2018 06:45 AM, slaven@rezic.de via RT wrote:
>>>> I fail to see how removing the blocker link causes any loss of
>>>> information as long as the ticket is left open.  Interested parties
>>>> can act on it whenever, well, they take an interest.
>>> In this case possibly interested parties (i.e. the author of the
>>> affected CPAN module) were not informed at all.
>>>
>> Shouldn't the module owner automatically be placed in the cc: at
>> ticket
>> creation time?
> Often bleadperl failures are fixed, without the need to tell the module owners.
>


I tend to inform the author if it's someone I know (even passingly), but
I think you raise a good point about the author needing to at least know
that their module is affected. Doubly so if we think it's an error they
need to fix and we do not intend to undo.

I think Karl's suggestion is the very minimum of communication we can
provide the author to keep them in the loop. If it's eventually resolved
on our end, they wouldn't need to do a thing, but they would at least
know. If we determine they had a bug, they would see it in the
correspondence.

It's a valuable step to add to the process.

Thread Previous | Thread Next


nntp.perl.org: Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at ask@perl.org | Group listing | About