David Tardon wrote:
On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 07:23:05AM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
Steven M. Parrish wrote:
Many people have mentioned that it is not right to ask the users to
file their bug reports upstream. I ask why not?
Let me summarize what I already wrote elsewhere in this thread:
* Users aren't necessarily developers.
* Users aren't necessarily interested in getting involved upstream.
* Users are reporting bugs against your product (your package in
Fedora), not against upstream's work (somebody else's product).
Let me try an analogy: How do you handle defects/malfunctions with your
car?
You'll visit your car dealer/a garage and report the issue to them.
You'll expect them to identify the problem and to take appropriate steps
to solve your issue.
Let me try another analogy: How do you handle health problems?
You'll visit your doctor. You'll expect him to identify the problem and
to take appropriate steps to solve your issue--that may well be just him
sending you to a specialist.
Correct.
Would you expect your doctor to serve as a
proxy between you and the specialist? Or even substitute you for
checkup? I wouldn't.
Of course, but in this case "the human" am "the product", which need to
go through the "bug fixing process".
You don't expect them to direct you to the car's
manufacturer or a component manufacturer and to discuss technical
details you have no knowledge about with them ("Is the stuttering engine
cause by triac 7 in a component A you haven't heard about before" or by
the hall sensor in component B you also haven't heard about before).
Who spoke about technical details?
I do, because analyzing bugs often requires a deep understanding of a
package's infrastructure/details/etc.. You can't expect end-users to be
able to have this understanding (nor to be interested in them), but you
can expect a Fedora packager to have it and to act as relay.
Have you ever been asked to look into
the source code of some project? I don't think so.
Oh, many times ...
An upstream developer
can ask better/more detailed questions than a packager, but that's only
to be expected.
Theoretically, yes ... in practice ... not always.
Btw, I'm really interested to hear why answering questions of an
upstream developer through a packager as a proxy is better than
answering the same questions directly...
I never said this - Upstreams contacting reporters, with a package
maintainer acting as proxy is an option.
Demanding end-users to get involved into upstreams and rendering Fedora
packagers into "stupid packaging robots", like Kevin's proposal implies,
is simply absurd.
Ralf
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
