|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

Re: Moving away from reporting to RH bugzilla and adopting pure upstream reporting mantra.

From:  Bill Nottingham <notting-AT-redhat.com>
To:  For testing and quality assurance of Fedora releases <test-AT-lists.fedoraproject.org>
Subject:  Re: Moving away from reporting to RH bugzilla and adopting pure upstream reporting mantra.
Date:  Mon, 23 Sep 2013 19:07:04 -0400
Message-ID:  <20130923230704.GA3227@nostromo.devel.redhat.com>
Archive‑link:  Article

Jan Wildeboer (jwildebo@redhat.com) said: 
> How will you track blocker bugs?
> 
> How can we see a global view of all open bugs? Aggregate from X upstream bug report systems?
Which not all are Bugzilla?
> 
> How can we track critical bugs?

Additional concerns I'd have above this:

- Not all things we ship have active upstream bug trackers to fall back on
- We still need a way to track Fedora-specific integration & packaging
  concerns, which would likely get closed upstream as 'NOTABUG' for that
  project
- What filing downstream gives the Fedora maintainer is a good mechanism 
  for knowing what's going on in that package in Fedora. Tracking *all*
  upstream bugs in a bug tracker may not be a good way to do so.

Honestly, I think a good dedicated triage team that works to verify and move
upstream as appropriate works better. But, you know, requires getting and
keeping such a team.

Bill
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test


to post comments


Copyright © 2013, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds