2010/3/29 Jaroslav Reznik <jreznik@xxxxxxxxxx>: > On Monday 29 March 2010 14:03:51 Yaakov Nemoy wrote: >> 2010/3/29 Michał Piotrowski <mkkp4x4@xxxxxxxxx>: >> > 2010/3/29 Oliver Falk <oliver@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: >> >> I had similar issues already and I totally agree with Christoph! >> >> The maintainer should not redirect the bugreporter to the upstream >> >> bugreporting plattform. I already have plenty of accounts on upstream >> >> bugzillas because of exactly this... >> > >> > I don't see any problem here if KDE SIG just declare "we don't fix KDE >> > bugs, we just update packages". >> > >> > They are not KDE developers, so they don't know how to fix these bugs. >> >> This response regardless, as a downstream user of a package, if i >> report a bug, it's nice to know if it's going to be fixed in a current >> release or not. Until the upstream bugfix lands in a package >> downstream, downstream should leave the bug open. > > Current Bugzilla policy says CLOSED as UPSTREAM is correct resolution. It's > just terminology - I would prefer another one - like just UPSTREAM status, or > ON_DEV UPSTREAM or something similar. CLOSED UPSTREAM does not mean that > nobody cares! It's still tracked! Sure, it's good to know that it's tracked. Maybe we should think about modifying the policy to make this more transparent. Perhaps a 'ON HOLD - UPSTREAM'. >> The bug can be used >> to track an update from bodhi too > > It's used to track in Bodhi. > >> and even suggest to the user that >> he download a package out of testing to see that it is fixed. Without >> the maintainers acting as the man in the middle, a potential bug >> reporter not only has to open an account with the KDE bug tracker, but >> then he might be asked to download source code, build it on his own, >> and do a number of other hassles to help upstream out. >> The maintainers >> can assist this by helping with test builds and so on. It's their >> responsibility, otherwise to track the issue upstream, regardless >> whether they are active developers. >> > > Usually we do this, we provide testing packages etc. But not only on Fedora > side but both sides. Ah cool. Still, it's something that is general to theoretically all maintainers. I don't want to mandate this, because ultimately maintainers are volunteers in the end. -Yaakov -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
