Matt McCutchen wrote:
> No. The bug is not an upstream bug per se until one has confirmed that
> it exists in the upstream version, which involves getting source and
> building it according to upstream's instructions, which adds up to a lot
> of work. If an upstream project has a good relationship with Fedora and
> is willing to investigate Fedora bugs, that's great. But if not, they
> have every right to chew out users who file bugs against them for a
> downstream version they don't control.
If the Fedora package contains no patches, then the Fedora version
effectively IS the upstream version.
Of course, if there are patches involved, it depends on the nature of the
patches whether they are relevant or not.
>> if the reporter refuses to
>> do that, it's only pure laziness.
>
> Maybe, but that's no justification to close the Fedora bug.
Sure it is. If the reporter is too lazy to do even very simple tasks to get
his/her bug fixed, why should I work for free for him/her? I'm neither the
reporter's slave nor his/her paid contractor.
Kevin Kofler
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
