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

Re: Maintainer Responsibilities



On Fri, 2009-06-05 at 09:01 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-06-04 at 23:19 +0200, Edwin ten Brink wrote:
> 
> > Aside from all discussions in this thread, the current Bugzilla 
> > documentation seems quite clear on this topic. Whatever the outcome of 
> > the discussion is, I think the documentation which is visible to the 
> > end-user (customer), should at least match the common practice/procedure.
> > 
> > Note also that the discussion is primarily focussed on the Resolution of 
> > the bug report, while there are also two Keywords available with respect 
> > to upstream. I've quoted the full texts below for reference.
> 
> >  From https://bugzilla.redhat.com/describekeywords.cgi
> 
> This page doesn't really cover Fedora policy or practice, it covers RHEL
> policy and practice, which is not the same thing.

Sorry, I mistook this: the page that's not strictly entirely applicable
to Fedora is the one you link to lower down:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/page.cgi?id=fields.html#status

not the keyword description page. We don't presently have a separate
keyword description page for Fedora. I haven't looked yet at whether any
of the keywords or descriptions are inapplicable to Fedora, if they are,
we should probably 'branch' that page too.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
http://www.happyassassin.net


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