smoke screen?

Posted Oct 2, 2008 8:38 UTC (Thu) by dgm (subscriber, #49227)
In reply to: smoke screen? by jwb
Parent article: Ubuntu debuts its Upstream Report

> The standard linux-kernel response to any bug report, no matter how obvious and serious, is as follows. "Could you please test 2.6.42-rc2-pre6-mm17+git20080909153242.8818?"

What else could one say? Most kernel bugs are related to specific hardware (that kernel's developers usually don't have).

> And although the kernel has its own bugzilla, kernel developers seem to ignore it as a policy.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the kernel's bugzilla an experiment to see if it helped? (and I think some kernel developers thought it was not worth the hassle).

smoke screen?

Posted Oct 3, 2008 16:32 UTC (Fri) by jengelh (guest, #33263) [Link] (1 responses)

Some developers, if not most, don't find it very amusing to register at Bugzilla, especially since there is no way to easily un- and reregister. For them, and that includes me, mail is so much easier.

smoke screen?

Posted Oct 16, 2008 15:30 UTC (Thu) by Duncan (guest, #6647) [Link]

The kernel bugzilla has certainly worked quite well for me. I've filed
and had fixed several -rc bugs that nobody else seemed to be running
into, that may well have made it into the full release were it not for my
report... which might not have been filed had I to try to figure out the
proper mail interface and rules. At least bugzilla is reasonably
familiar for those who run testing and early releases and regularly file
bugs elsewhere, thus already knowing a bit about the process, hopefully
therefore filing better bugs as a result.

Kernel bugzilla therefore expands the feedback loop, opening it to people
whose testing and bug reporting otherwise wouldn't be heard. When the
object is a stable kernel release and the testers are all volunteers,
that's a GOOD thing. =:^)

Duncan