Possible stock response for >1 issue in one BZ

[John Summerfield]

Kevin Kofler wrote:
> "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
>> And if i'm not mistaken I think the KDE maintainers that are within the
>> Fedora community wants
>> bugs against KDE in Fedora rather to be filed upstream instead of Red
>> Hat's bugzilla.
> 
> Right, KDE bugs should usually be reported to bugs.kde.org. They should get
> fixed upstream. Still, filing at bugzilla.redhat.com too can't hurt, worst
> case we'll just close it as UPSTREAM, but in some cases we'll backport
> fixes or even try to fix it ourselves if the problem is important enough
> and easy enough to fix. We just don't have to manpower to fix any and all
> KDE bugs by ourselves, not to mention that they should get fixed upstream
> so other distributions benefit from the fixes as well.
> 
>         Kevin Kofler
> 

If you took my source package and built it for inclusion in your distro, 
I don't think I would be very interested in helping your users. The 
first question I'd need answered, is "What is the difference between the 
version you (the user) got from your distributor and what I ship?"

For any significant project, I'm sure I would have entirely enough bugs 
of my own to sort out without worrying about bugs you might have introduced.

In the above, don't assume "I" means "John Summerfield" or that you 
means "Kevin Kofler."

Possibly the most famous incident of a distributor shipping much 
modified code (from a non-release at that) is the gcc project where RH 
took the current snapshot and distributed it as gcc 2.96. While RH took 
responsibility for its actions, it caused problems for the gcc crowd who 
got a lot of bug reports for problems not of their making, and for RH 
who got heaps from others, notably MYSQL, for years alleging problems in 
gcc 2.96 long after they were fixed.

I would say that, if you get KDE from the Fedora project, then it's 
right and proper to report them using the Fedora bug reporting 
facilities. If you get KDE from the KDS folk, Fedora doesn't want to 
know about it.

Fedora may well report the bug upstream, but that's not a reason to 
close it. Closing it implies there's no further action required because 
it's fixed (or diagnosed as not a real bug), and the fact of it 
remaining open allows people to see that it is so, add to the report and 
maybe see what's happening upstream.

-- 

Cheers
John

-- spambait
1aaaaaaa at coco.merseine.nu  Z1aaaaaaa at coco.merseine.nu
-- Advice
http://webfoot.com/advice/email.top.php
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555375

You cannot reply off-list:-)