Kernel Summit 2006: Kernel quality and development process [LWN.net]

Kernel Summit 2006: Kernel quality and development process

Posted Jul 18, 2006 13:49 UTC (Tue) by seyman (subscriber, #1172)
In reply to: Kernel Summit 2006: Kernel quality and development process by job
Parent article: Kernel Summit 2006: Kernel quality and development process

> I've never really liked the Bugzillas. Too much "database" and too little "conversation".

This seems to depend on the developpers using said Bugzillas and not on the tool per se.

> I'm not saying the tool is useless, it's great to track bugs, but there's tremendous room for improvement.

If you're serious about this, please come talk to the Bugzilla devs on IRC or via the mailing list (details are on http://www.bugzilla.org/). Better yes, file bugs in bugzilla.mozilla.org against the Bugzilla product.

(Log in to post comments)

Kernel Summit 2006: Kernel quality and development process

Posted Jul 30, 2006 18:01 UTC (Sun) by rmk (subscriber, #7713) [Link]

> This seems to depend on the developpers using said Bugzillas and not on the tool per se.

This is not my experience. If I look at my bugs in the kernel bugzilla, there are two outstanding bugs at the time of writing - 6716 and 6815.

6716 is presumed to be solved in 2.6.18-rc2, but asking the submitter to check this resulted in no response.

6815 currently defies logical explaination and the submitter also seems to have one to ground.

You claim that it depends on developers - I disagree. My experience has been that it depends more on users responding to developers, rather than dumping a bug in and running away. The submitter of a bug needs to takes on a certain responsibility to assist the resolution of the bug. Without that, developers are left out in the cold and have no option but to throw away potentially valid bug reports.

Because of that, I dislike bugzilla intensely. The tool itself is fine, but the effect it has (that I've perceived so far) is far from desirable.