<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 09/25/2012 07:54 PM, Adam Williamson
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:1348602892.1650.114.camel@adam" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">I don't see that that follows logically at <b class="moz-txt-star"><span class="moz-txt-tag">*</span>all<span class="moz-txt-tag">*</span></b>. The two just seem like
totally different things. Instructions for debugging a given component
are going to be the same whether you're running Fedora, Ubuntu, SUSE or
whatever: debugging systemd is debugging systemd. There may be cases
where there are local variations, in which case it makes sense to have a
local wiki page, but in cases where there aren't, it seems perfectly
sensible if the instructions are provided upstream. I don't see any way
in which that means bugs reports should always be upstream.</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
Upstream is also upstream for all those distribution and your point
being?<br>
<br>
Mine point is pretty obvious if we are going to be redirect
reporters upstream in the first place why not then just go the whole
way. <br>
<br>
In fact a lot of maintainers withing the distribution would like us
to do just that and while we dont have our own bugzilla instance
where reporters wont be hitting "Your not authorized to view this
bug" or other RHEL related bugzilla policies that nobody knows who
are ( or those that do cant disclose it ).<br>
<br>
To me we should either try to keep everything locally within the QA
community and withing the distribution by building our own knowledge
base or we should simply do it the other way around.<br>
<br>
JBG<br>
</body>
</html>