On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 09:50:06AM +0200, Matej Cepl wrote: > On 26/09/12 01:21, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: > >If we send reporters upstream to read documents we can just as well send > >them by the same method to upstream bugzilla's to file reports. > > Yes, I think it could be preferred way for some bugs and some > components (i.e., I would suggest much more aggressive use of > CLOSED/UPSTREAM). > > What would you prefer? Upstream balancing five bug reports in five > downstream bug trackers (plus his own) and wasting ton of time just > coordinating and communicating with them, or five bug reporters (and > their package maintainers, if required) working with the upstream in > the upstream bug tracker? > > I understand that it is not possible always (given the character of > the component in question, or because bug reporters are not able to > work with the upstream code, and of course it could genuinely be a > packaging bug or bug caused by other components in the distro), but > when it is possible, I think it should be preferred. -1. The Fedora maintainers are supposed to bring the upstream to the distribution and maintain it there. The Fedora users are supposed to use the distribution, not compile the upstream themselves. It's the Fedora maintainer that should do the communication with the upstream (they have accounts in the upstream bug tracking systems). And it's the Fedora maintainers that should release erratas, fixing the distribution for users of said distribution. -- Jan Pazdziora Principal Software Engineer, Satellite Engineering, Red Hat -- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
