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

Re: [rhelv6-list] Restricting bugzillas





On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 5:27 AM, Bob Arendt <rda rincon com> wrote:
On 01/12/2012 04:55 PM, Tim wrote:
Once upon a time, William Warren
<hescominsoon@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 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.


_______________________________________________
rhelv6-list mailing list
rhelv6-list redhat com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhelv6-list

Very good... wise and smart I'd say :)

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