<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">2008/4/5, Stephen John Smoogen <<a href="mailto:smooge@gmail.com">smooge@gmail.com</a>>:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
On Sat, Apr 5, 2008 at 6:43 AM, Michael Schwendt <<a href="mailto:mschwendt@gmail.com">mschwendt@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br> > On Sat, 5 Apr 2008 11:36:42 +0000 (UTC), Kevin Kofler wrote:<br> ><br> > > I think that instead of insulting the Triage Team's work, it would be more<br>
> > productive to kindly ask them to help you triaging the bugs you reported<br> > > because they are too many for you to deal with (something which is obvious to<br> > > me at least, I know what a mountain of bugs looks like!). I am sure you can<br>
> > work something out that way instead of creating bad air and sour grapes. Please<br> > > work with each other, not against each other!<br> ><br> > Tell that the bot!<br> ><br> > I mean it. Why the superfluous work? Where are the maintainers? Ah, I<br>
> remember, they are flooded with tickets and cannot handle them all. Then<br> > why should I spend more time on re-evaluating defects again if there is no<br> > guarantee that this time they will be fixed? Where in the protocol is the<br>
> person to work on the fix? Right, nowhere. The same [or new] maintainer may<br> > decide to ignore the report again due to lack of time or lack of interest.<br> > Till next time when I'll be asked to retest against F10.<br>
><br> > I don't criticise that tickets are set to NEEDINFO with some cool-looking<br> > "bzcl34nup" keyword applied to them. I criticise the plans to close<br> > tickets after 30 days, because that is equal to hiding things under the<br>
> carpet. And it doesn't help with orphaned packages either. Look at<br> > <a href="http://bugz.fedoraproject.org/plague">http://bugz.fedoraproject.org/plague</a> for example. The packages are<br> > unmaintained since FE6. What will happen if the NEEDINFO call is not<br>
> answered? The packages will remain broken and unmaintained. There are<br> > other packages where the example would be valid, too.<br> ><br> <br> <br>I realize you are frustrated but you do not seem to be happy with any<br>
solution. Leave them open forever... and it shows that no one cares.<br> Close them after a certain time and it shows that no one cares.<br> <br> Would you be happy with a firing squad for maintainers? A public wall<br> of shame? Is there anything that would make you happy that could be<br>
done within X weeks by Y volunteers?</blockquote><div><br>At least give maintainers an option to opt out, on a per maintainer and per package level of these bug genocides. I, e.g., just took over Beagle and am in the progress of reviewing all the open bugs I inherited as well as doing a major spec cleanup and preparing Fedora for a push of 0.3.x to F8 which will bring substantial improvements to the overall state of the situation. I do not wish the bugzappers to run around mocking with my bugs, their intentions might be good but they are making my personal process harder not easier - I would just like to say no to the drugs, please.<br>
<br>- David<br> </div><br></div><br>