GNU bug report logs - #8119
buggy 2011-02-14 trunk build on MS Windows

Previous Next

Full log

Message #33 received at 8119 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: "Drew Adams" <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
To: "'Eli Zaretskii'" <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: rgm <at> gnu.org, 8119 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: RE: bug#8119: 24.0.50; `mark-active' needs its doc string
Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2011 07:27:20 -0800

> > Think of my argument as a question, if you like:
> > What is the policy wrt retitling?
> 
> I think Glenn's arguments are entirely valid.

No one suggested otherwise.

> If there needs to be policy, Glenn is the first one we
> should ask, because he does most of the mundane work with
> the bug-tracker.

Fine.  But bug tracking is for users as well as developers.
Please keep that in mind when setting the policy.
It is not only about who does the bug-tracking mundane work.
Or at least it should not be (IMHO).

> FWIW, I see no harm at all in retitling, and I do see a certain
> value in having the title express the essence of the bug report.

And do you see such a policy as the general practice elsewhere?  What others do
elsewhere need not limit or guide us, but it can sometimes help to look over the
fence.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.