On Mon, 2009-03-23 at 22:51 +0900, John Summerfield wrote: > Christopher Beland wrote: > > (Regarding https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Beland/How_to_Triage ) > > > > On Wed, 2009-03-18 at 13:26 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > >> I'm not sure it's a good idea for the triager to do the work of > >> splitting a report which actually deals with multiple issues up into > >> separate reports. The problem is that then the triager becomes the > >> 'reporter', and it won't be clear to the maintainer that the real > >> reporter is actually some guy on the CC list. This could lead to > >> confusion. I'd prefer to put the onus on the reporter to split the > >> issues up. > > > > I was wondering whether cloning a bug would maintain the reporter? If > > Is "clone" like "fork?" Do you want two (or more) threads of discussion. > > An alternative to my previous suggestion might be a subordinate bug, > "this also occurs in ...." The parent bug cannot be closed (the software > won't allow it) until all subordinate bugs are fixed too. You can't do that, because there's no clear invariable parent/child relationship. Imagine a bug that exists in F10 and Rawhide. There are some cases where it might get fixed in F10 but not Rawhide, some where it might get fixed in Rawhide but not F10, some where it might get fixed in both and some where it might get fixed in neither. See what I mean about every possible choice having drawbacks... as I mentioned in a discussion on -devel-list, Launchpad handles this perfectly. But doing it in Bugzilla would require significant modifications. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- fedora-test-list mailing list fedora-test-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list
