Kevin Fenzi wrote: > Greetings. > > I happened to see the other week that there are currently around 1600 > open kernel bugs in bugzilla against currently supported Fedora > releases. :( The large majority of them are in NEW, and it's unclear > how many are at all useful to us. > > I'd like to revisit the idea of getting a team of bugzappers working on > triaging the kernel bugs so we do know more about whats got useful info > and what does not and let kernel maintainers be able to more clearly > see what could be worked on. Team of bugzappers sounds ok, but I'd rather leverage the community at the lowest/earliest level, by giving the report at least the opportunity to say, for example, "this looks like a filesystem/ext4/xfs/network/scsi/whatever bug" And then I'd see it, for the relevant buckets. Today I don't even look, because it's just a giant stew. So if we can't do better on the filing end, then maybe a team of bugzappers is warranted ... but can't we do better on the filing end? If I had a filesystem-related bucket or buckets to look at for fedora kernel bugs, I'd do it. Esp. if it sent me email. -Eric > So, the first question: Would this effort be worthwhile to kernel > maintainers? > > If 'yes', or 'perhaps', I have a bunch more questions about how you > folks would like to handle things: > > - Should bugs showing the user has a tainted kernel be simply closed? > Or should reporter be asked to duplicate without the tainting module? > Or both? :) > > - Should we ask folks for more info and close bugs after some > predefined time? How long should that be? > > - Should feature requests be closed and reporter asked to file upstream? > > - Should bugs that contain patches get a PATCH subject line or be just > asked to report upstream? > > - Is there a list of commands that would be helpful to run on any new > reported issue? uname/lsmod/dmesg? Anything else? Would smolt > profiles be of help? > > - Ideally I would like to sort bugs into large buckets based on > subsystem, and then put keywords or something on them so subsystem > maintainers could easily look at the bugs in their area. What would > be a list of such subsystems that would be useful? > > - Would it be helpfull to add a keyword or whiteboard on what kernel > version it was reported with? Then a search could find all bugs with > that particular version (of course it would need to change if > reporter updated, etc). > > - There seem to be a fair number of 'enable this option' or 'disable > this option' type requests. Would they be good to mark ? > > I've started a draft page at: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/KernelTriage > > I'd like to flesh it out more and look at adding some canned responses > there and then see how much interest there is to do this. > Comments/edits/shouting welcome. ;) > > kevin > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > kernel mailing list > kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel _______________________________________________ kernel mailing list kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel
