On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 01:29:39PM +0200, Christoph Wickert wrote: > Am Sonntag, den 11.07.2010, 06:13 +0200 schrieb Kevin Kofler: > > Matt McCutchen wrote: > > > If you're suggesting that an upstream bug report is information needed > > > to understand a Fedora bug, that's absurd. It's a step taken to resolve > > > the bug. Would you mark a bug INSUFFICIENT_DATA because the reporter > > > didn't provide a patch? > > > > Providing a patch is actually hard. Reporting a bug in the upstream bug > > tracker is just a matter of filling out the form, if the reporter refuses to > > do that, it's only pure laziness. > > Bingo! The very same could be said for the maintainer. :P > > The difference between the bug reporter and the package maintainer > is: [long list] The packager can also create a new testing package for the reporter to test, e.g. to verify that the bug is not yet fixed in a newer upstream release that is not in Fedora. But the big advantage the reporter has, is that he usually can easily reproduce the problem (if it is reproducible). The package maintainer might have a hard job to do so. Regards Till
Attachment:
pgpcy9wLrLJq0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
