On Thu, 2009-01-22 at 00:39 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Jesse Keating wrote: > > 1) the same "bug" may be caused by different things in different > > releases. Not every package has the same code for the entire release > > family. > > That's pretty rare. Even where the version differs, the bug can still be the > same. Even for Amarok 1 and 2, which are very different, there are bugs in > common with almost the same code involved (like the recently-fixed security > issue). Might be rare in your world, but isn't rare in mine. > > 2) different sets of users care about bugs in different release trees. > > Closing a bug as fixed->rawhide doesn't help the user who is hitting > > this issue on say F-9. > > Solution: make it a policy that bugs should never be closed Rawhide unless > they only affected Rawhide. It should also be required to push bugfixes out > to at least updates-testing as soon as the bug gets fixed in Rawhide, > unless there is a really good reason not to (e.g. the fix needs a rewrite > of the whole application). Then that just means our rawhide bug lingers open even when it may be fixed, which throws off trackers and blockers and queries. Not a solution. > > > 3) bodhi auto-closing. Not every update gets pushed at the same time, > > Then that's the issue to solve. Right, and how do you propose we "solve" this (not that I agree that this is a problem)? > > > and closing a single bug when an F-10 update goes out doesn't help the > > F-9 users know that the update for their release has gone out, or been > > delayed, or just not provided. > > But having the bug cloned does not solve this, requiring bugfixes to be > pushed to all supported releases at the same time (unless there's a strong > reason not to) does. At the same time doesn't work. What if your attempted fix on F-9 fails, but the fix on F-10 succeeds? Should the F-10 build sit in updates-testing until the say that F-9 works? F-10 users just suffer for the sake of having the push go at the same time? Ridiculous. > > > 4) The maintainer is the right person to decide if the bugs should be > > collapsed into one, rather than the triager trying to make a judgement > > call. It's easier to close->dup than to clone in the first place, if > > all the above doesn't apply. > > I really don't want to have to close clones as duplicates all the time, and > triagers might even end up creating new clones if they notice there's only > one. You can always opt out of having triagers touch KDE bugs. -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature! identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
