Emmanuel Seyman wrote:
* Stephen John Smoogen [08/04/2008 23:23] :In some cases that will mean a maintainer loses a package if they are not responding to bugs.Can't we just open up the ACLs for that package? It doesn't matter that the maintainer doesn't use Bugzilla, only that someone is able to commit the bug's fix to the package (and push out an update?).
Open acls are good.OTOH, if a maintainer doesn't use Bugzilla, there's a definite problem. Bugzilla is a primary form of contact between users and developers. If a maintainer doesn't use Bugzilla, it could be argued that they aren't paying attention to a major portion of their responsibilities to a package.
This is the thing I hate most about Ubuntu-launchpad. There's no culture of watching the bug tracker (or it's not consistent between the Ubuntu distro people and the upstream people hosted in launchpad) so putting a bug in launchpad might not ever be read by the relevant parties.
In Fedora it may sometimes feel the same but at least our messaging is sane: Every bug belongs in Bugzilla. When the process falls down (because a maintainer is ignoring bugzilla) we need to find a way to address that (triage team looks at bugs and flags important ones for the maintainer; opening acls so more people can work on a package; getting maintainers to release packages that they do not care about; etc).
-Toshio
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
