On Mon, 26 Apr 2010 12:14:43 -0400 Dave Jones <davej@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 11:21:02AM -0400, Kyle McMartin wrote: > > On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 09:58:12PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > > > > Well, I asked around about that, but not sure how > > > > easy/possible it is to do with our current setup. Basically > > > > bugzilla gets populated from pkgdb, which has a list of > > > > packages, owners, cc people, etc. > > > > > > > > It doesn't have a way to say: kernel is this, and has > > > > subsystem X, Y, Z > > > > > > Yep, that's the answer I'd heard before too, unfortunately. > > > It's a pity that the tools seem to be this inflexible. > > > > > > the kernel.org bugzilla is much better at this. :( > > > > > > > There's no /particular/ reason we couldn't use the kernel.org > > bugzilla for Fedora if it would improve things... > > the problem with using the kernel.org bz for Fedora bugs is that > if they report a bug which turns out not to be a kernel bug, we can't > reassign it to the right package, they need to file a new bug back at > rhbz. Also, many people won't know to do that, so they will report bugs against something else in fedora (if we remove the kernel component) or keep filing them in the fedora bugzilla (if we leave the kernel component). > It's sad that after all these years the only bz interoperability > solution that's appeared is "use launchpad", which isn't a solution > at all. Yes indeed. ;( kevin
_______________________________________________ kernel mailing list kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel
