Re: Moving away from reporting to RH bugzilla and adopting pure upstream reporting mantra.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 09/24/2013 12:50 PM, Frank Murphy wrote:
On Tue, 24 Sep 2013 12:44:02 +0000
"Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" <johannbg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I'm not sure what that response is supposed to be adding to the
discussion since it's a well known fact the discomfort it brings to
reporters to have them go upstream to report.
I've added it because have stated "bugs" go unanswered.
That is the "problem" need fixing, not bugzilla.

There are 4 reasons that happens.

1. the packager is gone awol
2. the packager does not know how to fix
3. the maintainer lacks time to fix it.
4. bugzilla is not the interface the maintainer finds effective so he ignores it


Is missing maintainer period too long?
Extra co-maintainers needed, with commit access?

Now can you throw as much endeavour into helping resolve that


To effectively resolve that you need to reduce the total number of components in the distribution as well as how many components maintainer is allowed to maintain as well as finding the communication interface with the maintainer which he finds effective.

Reporting upstream is one solution to the interface problem, detecting poorly maintained packages as well as orphaning unmaintained packages and coming up with a time sharing program takes care of the rest.

With the exception of reporting directly upstream which I have been always against, I pointed out the other things and you can find the discussion surrounding that in the archives on devel.

JBG
--
test mailing list
test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test





[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Photo Sharing]     [Yosemite Forum]     [KDE Users]

  Powered by Linux