[rhelv6-list] Restricting bugzillas

[Bob Arendt]

On 01/12/2012 04:55 PM, Tim wrote:
>> Once upon a time, William Warren
>> <hescominsoon at emmanuelcomputerconsulting.com>  said:
>>> RedHat used to leave its bugzilla mostly open.  I am seeing more and
>>> more closed bugzilla entries even to registered accounts.  Is this part
>>> of trying to hide things from oracle?
>>
>> I think it is more that they actually use BZ more for customer-related
>> stuff than they used to, and a bug has customer-related information, it
>> will be private.
>> --
>> Chris Adams<cmadams at hiwaay.net>
>> Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Internet Services
>> I don't speak for anybody but myself - that's enough trouble.
>>
>
> I'm with Chris on this one. I don't think RedHat are making BZ entries
> private to hide bugs from "competitors". I suspect it's because most of
> the bugs are logged by customers and contain private customer data that
> the customer would prefer not to be made public.
>
> In an ideal word RedHat would make a new public bug with just the
> description and no customer data but suspect that that would be
> impractical.
>
> If you really want to know about a bug; call your TAM or log a support
> case. I'm sure will give provide the details you require.
>
Whenever I log a support case, the corresponding BZ that RedHat files is
marked private. I believe that they are assuming that any customer info
submitted is potentially confidential, unless explicitly told otherwise;
That's the cautious thing to do.

To avoid this, I now always file a BZ first, and refer to it in the
support case that I file immediately after.  This ensures that the BZ
is public, and RedHat can assume that it's not private information
since I published it in an open forum.