emv@math.lsa.umich.edu (Edward Vielmetti) (04/05/90)
In article <9004050051.AA11859@expire.lcs.mit.edu> rws@EXPO.LCS.MIT.EDU (Bob Scheifler) writes:
From: rws@EXPO.LCS.MIT.EDU (Bob Scheifler)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
Date: 5 Apr 90 00:51:11 GMT
Access to bug reports and their status is one of the benefits of membership
in the X Consortium. Many bugs get fixed without ever being published as
public patches; access to these fixes is also one of the benefits of
membership. We have no plans to make bug reports generally available.
alt.x-windows.bugs is an unmoderated group for the reporting of
bugs in X. Posters should use the standard bug reporting form
used to report bugs to xbugs@expo.lcs.mit.edu, and arrange for
cc'ing a copy of the bug report to this group. (A mail alias
will be set up at some point to make this easier.)
It appears to be the policy of the X Consortium that bug reports are
available only to Consortium members, as a benefit of membership. By
posting your bug reports to alt.x-windows.bugs, you avoid this
information hoarding and enable the entire community to share this
valuable information.
The group is unmoderated because it's easy to set up that way. It may
prove more useful at some point to moderate the group. This group is
not officially santioned by the X Consortium; there's no guarantee
that any of them will read it. Some articles in alt.x-windows.bugs
will be cc'ed in after the fact from comp.windows.x with permission
from the original poster.
alt.x-windows.bugs is the first of several newsgroups in the alt
hierarchy dealing with X11. Your input in further groups is welcomed,
that discussion will happen in alt.config. I hope that some of the
alt.x-windows groups will eventually appear as comp.windows.x
subgroups, once the names are decided on and some useful traffic
appears.
--Ed
Edward Vielmetti, U of Michigan math dept.jim@EXPO.LCS.MIT.EDU (Jim Fulton) (04/11/90)
alt.x-windows.bugs Gee, why not just alt.windows.x.bugs (gotta banish that x-windows :-)? It would make migration into comp.* easier. Also, one should point out that we've always encouraged people to cross-post bug reports to other lists/newsgroups/etc when a more immediate answer is desired.
ado@elsie.UUCP (Arthur David Olson) (04/11/90)
> Access to bug reports and their status is one of the benefits of membership > in the X Consortium. Many bugs get fixed without ever being published as > public patches; access to these fixes is also one of the benefits of > membership. We have no plans to make bug reports generally available. The natural followup question is, then: when will expo.lcs.mit.edu's name change to expo.lcs.mit.com? -- US: one small step. Canada: . Arthur David Olson ado@alw.nih.gov ADO is a trademark of Ampex.
markc@Solbourne.COM (Mark Connell) (04/11/90)
>> We have no plans to make bug reports generally available. > >The natural followup question is, then: when will expo.lcs.mit.edu's name >change to expo.lcs.mit.com? Right after they start charging you $1500/seat for their code. Mark A. Connell Solbourne Computer, Inc. 1900 Pike Road Longmont, Co 80501 (303) 772-3400 markc@Solbourne.COM ...!uunet!stan!markc
thakur@eddie.mit.edu (Manavendra K. Thakur) (04/14/90)
In article <9004050051.AA11859@expire.lcs.mit.edu> rws@EXPO.LCS.MIT.EDU (Bob Scheifler) writes: >Access to bug reports and their status is one of the benefits of membership >in the X Consortium. Many bugs get fixed without ever being published as >public patches; access to these fixes is also one of the benefits of >membership. We have no plans to make bug reports generally available. Could you at least give us some guidelines as to *which* bug reports and fixes you do tend to publish as public patches? There are a lot of patches posted to xpert and other public forums, and keeping track of them is largely a case of being in the right place at the right time. So it'd be very helpful to know whether a particular patch posted to xpert is likely to make it into an official patch or not -- if I can tell that the fix is likely to be included into an official patch, then I don't have to save it. Also, can you answer exactly who makes the decision to send public patches? I mean, I assume it's the X Consortium, but how do you folks decide which patches to publish publicly? In particular, do the Consortium members (i.e. vendors) have veto power over what type of fixes you decide to publish? I applaud the X Consortium for its fine work and ongoing support of X11, but I have to say that I find this sort of bugfix hoarding to be offensive and distasteful. I suppose, though, that there's not really much I can do about it. Manavendra K. Thakur System Manager, High Energy Division Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophyics thakur@zerkalo.harvard.edu thakur@cfa.harvard.edu