[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Unverified issues?
From: |
David Kastrup |
Subject: |
Re: Unverified issues? |
Date: |
Mon, 30 Sep 2013 14:11:45 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux) |
Eluze <address@hidden> writes:
> Phil Holmes-2 wrote
>> As Graham said, if you want to limit the time you spend, and spend it on
>> other bug squad duties, fine - leave loads unverified. If you've still
>> got
>> them next week, complain!
>
> I'm not complaining, rather I'm pitying those who miss the chance to verify.
>
> if one day we change the duty days there will automatically be a shift to
> the member being on duty after the upgrade.
Maybe we need to shift schedules such that their greatest common divisor
is rather small.
> but it's good to know I can stop after my X minutes and the work will
> still be done.
Who would not be happy to know that?
--
David Kastrup
- Re: Unverified issues?, (continued)
- Re: Unverified issues?, Phil Holmes, 2013/09/29
- Re: Unverified issues?, David Kastrup, 2013/09/29
- Re: Unverified issues?, Eluze, 2013/09/29
- Re: Unverified issues?, Phil Holmes, 2013/09/29
- Re: Unverified issues?, David Kastrup, 2013/09/29
- Re: Unverified issues?, Janek WarchoĊ, 2013/09/29
- Re: Unverified issues?, Eluze, 2013/09/29
- Re: Unverified issues?, Graham Percival, 2013/09/29
- Re: Unverified issues?, Phil Holmes, 2013/09/30
- Re: Unverified issues?, Eluze, 2013/09/30
- Re: Unverified issues?,
David Kastrup <=