On Tue, 2006-02-14 at 21:26 -0400, John DeDourek wrote: > n0dalus wrote: > > >On 2/15/06, Rahul Sundaram <sundaram@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > >>[...] I dont see this as improvement that affects triaging. > >> > >> > >> > > > >I think that any bugzilla improvements resulting in improved bug > >reports or reduced numbers of duplicates should in turn increase > >triaging efficiency. > > > >n0dalus. > > > > > > > A related question from a "newbie". If I think I have a bug in > FC(n) and a search finds a remarkably similar bug in FC(n-1), be > it OPEN, CLOSED, NEEDINFO_REPORTER, or whatever, filed by someone > else, what should be my next step? Good point. If it's OPEN or NEEDINFO it's probably good to tack on to the bug and say it's still present in FC(n), version x.y-z of the package. Sometimes "remarkably similar" is only in the eyes of the reporter, though... I think Mike Harris has mentioned that he gets X bugs where people with different chipsets but the same symptoms pile onto the same bug report, making the eventual resolution of the bug next to impossible. If it's CLOSED, I'd say that opening a new bug (mentioning the previous bug if you think there's a relationship) is my gut feeling. Someone else may have better reasoning that there's a better way to deal with this though. -Toshio
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
