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

Re: Maintainer Responsibilities

On Thu, 2009-06-04 at 17:27 +0100, Paul Howarth wrote:

> I'll happily raise upstream bugs myself but it irks me when maintainers 
> close Fedora bugs with the UPSTREAM resolution without actually taking 
> the upstream fix and bringing it into Fedora.
> If I've reported a bug in Fedora bugzilla it's because the bug is 
> present in Fedora and I'd like to see it fixed *in Fedora*. So seeing a 
> bug closed UPSTREAM doesn't help at all if I have a real problem with a 
> Fedora package.

In Mandriva I had it set up so Bugzilla has both an UPSTREAM
*resolution* and an UPSTREAM *keyword*. This handles this situation.

If, say, the bug is in a package that gets frequent releases, and was
filed on the development release, you can just use CLOSED UPSTREAM,
because you can rely on the fact that there'll be a new upstream release
of the package soon after the upstream report is fixed, you (the
maintainer) will then naturally package the new release, and the fix for
the bug will have been rolled into the distribution package without you
having to do anything besides your normal packaging work.

In other situations, you can set the UPSTREAM keyword, so the bug
remains open but you know it's being handled upstream and you need to
bring the fix downstream once it's available upstream.
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org

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