On 09/24/2012 08:59 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Mon, 24 Sep 2012 20:31:41 +0000
"Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" <johannbg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
The general idea was to increase activity within the QA community and
improve reporting at the same time without having them running around
the whole internet while doings so.
Sure, but duplicating upstream work seems not very productive to me.
Less about duplication more about increasing our own local activity and
knowledge base where we can write those pages based on the experience
level we expect
( which should always be the lowest one hence I have always written
those pages with spoon feeding information ).
If the community prefers to run to various upstreams for this info we
can just as well stop reporting to Red Hat's bugzilla and report
directly upstream instead. ( something I have been very much against
in the past for the very same reasons )
Well, in the case of bugs there's give and take and bidirectional
communication. In the case of debugging info/steps it's more of a
static list. If upstream already produces such a list, shouldn't we
just point to that?
There is nothing that says that list is more up2date than what we have
locally and based on your logic if upstream has test cases should we
just point reporters to that?
JBG
--
test mailing list
test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
