On Jueves 04 Junio 2009 20:23:01 Adam Williamson escribió: > On Thu, 2009-06-04 at 17:27 +0100, Paul Howarth wrote: > > I'll happily raise upstream bugs myself but it irks me when maintainers > > close Fedora bugs with the UPSTREAM resolution without actually taking > > the upstream fix and bringing it into Fedora. > > > > If I've reported a bug in Fedora bugzilla it's because the bug is > > present in Fedora and I'd like to see it fixed *in Fedora*. So seeing a > > bug closed UPSTREAM doesn't help at all if I have a real problem with a > > Fedora package. > > In Mandriva I had it set up so Bugzilla has both an UPSTREAM > *resolution* and an UPSTREAM *keyword*. This handles this situation. > > If, say, the bug is in a package that gets frequent releases, and was > filed on the development release, you can just use CLOSED UPSTREAM, > because you can rely on the fact that there'll be a new upstream release > of the package soon after the upstream report is fixed, you (the > maintainer) will then naturally package the new release, and the fix for > the bug will have been rolled into the distribution package without you > having to do anything besides your normal packaging work. > > In other situations, you can set the UPSTREAM keyword, so the bug > remains open but you know it's being handled upstream and you need to > bring the fix downstream once it's available upstream. I like idea of some TRACKING_UPSTREAM keyword - it's easy to search and CLOSED bugs are not as easy to search for duplicates when you are reporting bug. Jaroslav > Adam Williamson > Fedora QA Community Monkey > IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org > http://www.happyassassin.net -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
