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

Re: An interesting read when discussing what to do about our bugs...



nodata wrote:
Am Samstag, den 19.01.2008, 13:10 -0500 schrieb seth vidal:
On Sat, 2008-01-19 at 19:08 +0100, nodata wrote:

Apart from security bugs, I have never had a bug fixed in Ubuntu, ever.
The tactic seems to be to wait until Debian fix it, or wait until Debian
fix it and then ask you to upgrade to the next release.

Fedora does a lot better, much better, but probably the most annoying
aspect of using Fedora's bugzilla is the attitude of some of the
maintainers (not all) and the "closing, report upstream" attitude.

Closing a bug report with "report it upstream" is a let down. It's
repetitive boring work that a computer should be doing.

It takes a lot of effort to report a bug, and by this I mean that I know
a *lot* of people who find a bug, and maybe a fix, but don't bug report
it. They should be, but I can see why they don't.
Hmm, is that what the 'upstream' close reason is for? Normally, I close
things 'upstream' when I have checked a fix into the upstream code base.
Which seems pretty reasonable time to close it to me.

-sv


I'm talking about closing the bug and telling the reporter to report
upstream, i.e. "go away".


I agree that the above is bad.

Sometimes (rarely) I do forward a bugreport upstream (using upstream's preferred bug tracking mechanism) and then kindly explain that I'm not intimate enough with the code to fix the issue at hand with a reasonable effort, point them to the upstream bug and add them to the CC there if possible. And then close with a resolution of upstream. Not very pretty, but honest and way better then letting bugs linger for months.

Regards,

Hans


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