Re: RFC: BugURL in packages

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 2:43 PM, Neal Gompa <ngompa13@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 6:03 AM, Fabio Valentini <decathorpe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Feb 15, 2018 11:52, "Pierre-Yves Chibon" <pingou@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 11:22:27AM +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>> Hash: SHA256
>>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> it's been just 9 years since BugURL has been added to RPM, but it has not
>>> been
>>> used.
>>>
>>> I think it would be helpful for users to have it defined in RPMs, so when
>>> they
>>> do `dnf info`, `rpm -qi` they would just click on it and it would select
>>> right
>>> component, right version and such for it.
>>>
>>> Do you think same way? If so, which URL should we put there?
>>
>> I think bugz.fedoraproject.org/<package name> is potentially a good url to
>> use
>> for this.
>>
>>
>> Linking to fedora bugzilla was my first "instinct". However, it is
>> completely redundant and doesn't add any new information to the package,
>> since it's the same URL for every package in fedora. Additionally, such URLs
>> don't even work right now (certificate errors and 404s, at least for me).
>>
>> In contrast, adding a link to upstream bug tracking (which is actually
>> different everywhere) would provide useful additional  information.
>>
>
> I'd argue otherwise. Generally speaking, bugs related to packages
> should absolutely be filed with Fedora. It is the maintainer who must
> judge whether it's something Fedora caused or upstream caused, and
> file the appropriate bug there. We are the stewards of the experience
> in Fedora, so we get first dibs on bug reports, too. ;)

I didn't argue that bugs should be reported upstream, I just wanted to
express that including redundant information isn't useful IMO.

Reporting bugs for fedora packages is the same process for every
fedora package, so that doesn't have to be documented seperately.
Upstream bug trackers aren't tracked/documented in fedora (.specs)
yet, however. That's the reason why I think providing links to
upstream trackers adds value, whereas linking to a fedora component in
rhbz / fedora bug list for a package doesn't.

Fabio

> --
> 真実はいつも一つ!/ Always, there's only one truth!
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux