Comment 1 Kubilay Kocak 2018-03-04 08:03:19 UTC

This is intentional and occurs in cases where two category/portname's are referenced in the issue summary. In this condition, MAINTAINERS of both ports are added to CC, as it cannot be resolved (objectively, in all cases) which one should be the assignee.

Comment 2 Yuri Victorovich 2018-03-04 08:13:24 UTC

(In reply to Kubilay Kocak from comment #1)

But only one port was referenced in this case: net-im/uTox.

Comment 3 Kubilay Kocak 2018-03-04 08:21:00 UTC

(In reply to Yuri Victorovich from comment #2)

" net-im/tox " appears in the issue summary

Comment 4 Yuri Victorovich 2018-03-04 08:23:40 UTC

(In reply to Kubilay Kocak from comment #3)

Ah, I see!


IMO, it should pick the first one then.

Comment 5 Kubilay Kocak 2018-03-04 08:26:23 UTC

(In reply to Yuri Victorovich from comment #4)

We considered this during auto-assigner development for this condition, but issues (referencing multiple ports) can be written in multiple ways, with any of the ports as the 'first one'.

Its prefereable that both maintainers discuss/decide the 'right' assignee and assign themselves with a comment , than have incorrect assignees and assignee churn

Comment 6 Kubilay Kocak 2018-03-04 08:28:44 UTC

The experience could perhaps be improved by the Auto-Assigner adding a comment in this condition to alert the maintainers and describe the ambiguity, though we less verbosity/noise where possible is preferred. Maybe something like:

"Multiple ports referenced in summary, CC'ing multiple MAINTAINERs. Please self-assign"

Comment 7 Yuri Victorovich 2018-03-04 08:36:13 UTC

I see.

Ok, I will close it then.

Thank you, Kubilay, for your explanation!