On Wed, 2008-03-26 at 10:32 +0100, Matej Cepl wrote: > On 2008-03-25, 18:21 GMT, Nils Philippsen wrote: > > Well, we already have some information about several upstream > > bugzillas (let's keep this simple for the moment and ignore > > trac, sourceforge e.a. bug trackers). In theory it should > > simply be a case of asking "Please <link>create a bugzilla > > ticket upstream</link>. If you don't have an account at > > $upstream_bugzilla, <link>register here</link>." Clicking on > > the first link would drop the user into a pre-filled form that > > automatically Cc's the Fedora maintainer etc. We could store > > the identities at other Bugzillas with the user's account to > > make it even smoother. Or maybe something like OpenID can be > > used for that. > > The advantage of my scenario is that our reporters don't need to > make yet another useless account in some bugzilla > (http://uselessaccount.com/). I had a lot of complaints from our > reporters about that -- "I have reported this already, why you > guys are so much talking about cooperation, and you are not able > to resolve it among yourself." I know there are some reasons, but > considering that bug reporters are our most valuable asset (which > I believe firmly) we should try most to treat them well. > > Remember, we are not making them any favor that they have to file > a bug against the software we have provided them. > > Especially considering that there ARE possible scenarios how to > do it -- and the rest is (IMHO, IAAL, IANAP, etc.) just not that > complicated coding. IMO the reasonable compromise is: For bugs: 1. the package maintainer should reasonably attempt to reproduce the bug and/or analyse it whether it is possibly caused by integration changes which are Fedora specific. 2. a) if he can reproduce or is caused by integration changes - fix it or report it upstream b) if he cannot reproduce it - ask reporter to report it upstream For enhancement requests: I'd leave this on package maintainers whether they are interested in the enhancement enough to help implementing it by reporting upstream and/or eventually creating a patch and so on. I don't see any value in package maintainers to be a mediator in a dialogue between upstream and the bug/enhancement reporter when he as a mediator wouldn't add anything to the communication. This would be the case when he cannot reproduce the bug or he isn't interested in the enhancement. -- Tomas Mraz No matter how far down the wrong road you've gone, turn back. Turkish proverb -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
