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

Re: Package Review Stats for the week ending January 18th, 2009

Am Donnerstag, den 29.01.2009, 06:25 -0500 schrieb Behdad Esfahbod:
> Christoph Wickert wrote:
> >
> > I think what Robert and me wanted to express is: It's not only that some
> > (!) people from RH do not follow the guidelines but some also explicitly
> > refuse to follow them even after they were told them what's wrong. I
> > have no explanation for that kind of behavior but arrogance. 
> I have a very unpleasant experience with a community maintainer over a package
> we co-maintained and that I'm the upstream.  Do I extrapolate that to all
> non-RH people?  No.  

Me nether, I repeatedly used the word "some".

> Stop discriminating already.  If an RH person doesn't
> follow Fedora rules and guidelines, follow the standard Fedora procedures to
> deal with them.

The standard procedure would be to 
a) close the review NOTABUG or
b) follow the AWOL procedure if reporter does not respond.
Please show me a single case where we (community AND/OR Red Hat)
successfully applied a) or b) to a RH employee.

> Stop whining.  Please.

I'll shut up if you can show me such a case.

> >> Most of what is seen as "Red Hat guys are bad at packaging" is simply baggage
> >> held from the Core days.  
> > 
> > Agreed, but we've had merge reviews with proposals for enhancements and
> > fixes that did not get applied by the owner. I have never ever seen this
> > from a community member. If someone did, his review request would be
> > closed "WONTFIX" pretty soon, but this isn't possible for merge reviews.
> Sure.  That's a problem with the merge review procedure perhaps?  Definitely
> not something to blame the poor RH developer for.

It's not only the merge reviews. I can show you bugs where a package was
broken for a whole release and the bug was closed "WONTFIX" because the
package was EOL then. Looking at my bugzilla frontpage I see a couple of
bugs that are older than a year and still new or already closed.
Assignees were not even responding when I set NEEDINFO. _All_ these bugs
are assigned to Red Hat developers, _not_a_single_ of them to a
community maintainer. How comes?


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