On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 06:31:44PM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > For the record, I am referencing > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/BugStatusWorkFlow#CLOSED > > Currently, the official bug lifecycle includes the following phrase: > "The resolution UPSTREAM can be used by maintainers to denote a bug that > they expect to be fixed by upstream development and naturally rolled > back into Fedora as part of the update process. Ideally, a comment > should be added with a link to the upstream bug report." > > I've seen quite a few bugs lately closed with this resolution (mostly in > the Evolution and GNOME projects for me personally). It seems to me that > this is terribly useless in terms of informing users when their bugs are > fixed. > > Essentially, when closing this bug as UPSTREAM, we are communicating to > our users "This will get fixed. Probably. And it will get pulled into > Fedora eventually. Probably." Most people, when they can actually be > convinced to file a real bug report (even through ABRT), are doing so > because they have an issue with the software and want to know when it's > fixed. The libreoffice team uses this resolution for 1) bugs that are not reproducible, but we _think_ we know what is the cause (these are mostly "fire and forget" abrt bugs, where we managed to get something useful from the backtrace) 2) bugs that only appear under very specific conditions and are unlikely to affect many users. We do not see anything wrong with this resolution. D. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
