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

Re: Maintainer Responsibilities



> On Tuesday 02 June 2009 06:17:02 pm Steven M. Parrish wrote:
> > This is from the official Bugzappers page
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/StockBugzillaResponses#Upstream
> >in
>
> So, this raises the question about bugzappers. Should they be making the
> determination for maintainers that the reporter should have taken the issue
> upstream? Do bug zappers take into consideration the severity of the bug
> before pushing someone upstream?
>
> > The bug is not a packaging bug, the package maintainer has no plans to
> > work on this in the near future, and there is an upstream bug tracking
> > system other than the Red Hat Bugzilla.
>
> Is there communication between maintainer and bugzapper before  doing this?

I can only speak for myself and not the other triagers.  I work solely on KDE 
issues because in addition to triage I also maintain several KDE packages and 
work closely with the other maintainers.  The upstream method we use was 
discussed and agreed to as the best solution to make sure the issues get to 
where they need to be.

I would suggest that any triager get to know the packages they triage and the 
maintainers and together agree to how the wish to handle this issue.
>
> > Maintainers should be free to either fix it locally (time permitting) and
> > upstream the patch or request that the bug be filed at the upstream
> > projects tracker for the upstream developers to resolve it.
> >
> > If it is sent upstream the bug is closed as UPSTREAM and our local report
> > is cross-referenced to the upstream one.  That way the maintainer and all
> > interested parties can follow its progress.
>
> Not if its closed. How would I be notified that the fix is in Fedora? If
> the bug is severe enough, shouldn't the upstream commit be applied to
> Fedora's package and the package pushed out for testing? Is all this going
> to happen if the bug is closed?
>

This is a good point.  That is why we want the report filed upstream by the 
reporter.  They are then cc'd to the upstream report and can follow it as it 
progresses.  

In the future I will work to make sure that the local BZ report is kept 
updated with the status in Fedora.


Many people have mentioned that it is not right to ask the users to file their 
bug reports upstream.  I ask why not?  Obviously by reporting the issue to us 
they feel it is important and needs to be addressed.  The took the time to 
open a RH bugzilla account to file the report, so I don't see why they can't 
take 60 seconds and open an upstream account as well.  (Open-ID would solve 
that issue.)  If the issue is important to them they will do it.

If the reporter does not file it upstream and we feel we have enough 
information to go on, I will file it upstream to make sure the issue is 
addressed.  

This is an issue that needs to be addressed by the BugZappers group and a 
proposal taken before FESCO so an official policy can be agreed upon.  I'll 
place this on the agenda for the next meeting.  

SMP 


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