Bugzilla prioritised improvements list

[Rahul Sundaram]

Hi


If anyone needs add to the list, kindly file a RFE against bugzilla 
itself in http://bugzilla.redhat.com and reply to this mail with the 
report link retaining the CC list. We could take a look at 
http://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2005-December/msg00057.... 
and http://bugzilla.gnome.org for other ideas.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79625 – Use 
milestones instead of tracking bugs. (policy change)

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=168000 - Bugs with 
NEEDINFO should be auto closed after 3 weeks with a comment

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=169746 -Dupe detection.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=181524 - Make 
searching for duplicates search closed bugs as well

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91306 - Private 
field for setting developer priority

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111799 - Is "Red 
Hat Raw Hide" product obsolete?

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=151781 - "Add me to 
CC list" as default

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54231 - Ability to 
append comments via Email

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166174 - Better 
name for "MODIFIED" status

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118070 - Using 
Bugzilla as a repository for release notes feedback...

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92088 - default to 
"auto-detect" in the create attachments screen

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=164763 -– "steps to 
reproduce" field should not be mandatory if enhancement is selected.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=137034 - Need an 
owner per release/component

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=154357 - Kill the 
spam spiders on Bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=132004 - QA contact 
was removed instead of my email added to cc:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=137433 - "Add bug 
to my list" for "This bug is not in your list"

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79568 - – Time 
stamps say "UTC", but are really in Eastern

-- 
Rahul 

Fedora Bug Triaging - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers

[Thomas M Steenholdt]

Not sure where put put it, but i find that one of the reasons bz is hard 
to find duplicates in, are because the "devel" version under "fedora 
core" product, for example, is not about bugs in current rawhide, as 
expected, but has bugs that dates back to the "old days" making
"devel" 
a wierd moving target and test-x almost outdated on release, since most 
testers will be using rawhide anyways.

Perhaps there could be some refinement useful here???

/Thomas

[Ralf Ertzinger]

Hi.

On Wed, 15 Feb 2006 22:22:53 +0100, Thomas M Steenholdt wrote:

>  Not sure where put put it, but i find that one of the reasons bz is
>  hard to find duplicates in, are because the "devel" version under
>  "fedora core" product, for example, is not about bugs in current
>  rawhide, as expected, but has bugs that dates back to the "old days" 
I'm sorry? I was under the impression that FC->Devel was the category
tracking, well FC devel, which is what rawhide was some years ago.

[Thomas M Steenholdt]

Ralf Ertzinger wrote:
>  Hi.
>  
>  On Wed, 15 Feb 2006 22:22:53 +0100, Thomas M Steenholdt wrote:
>  
> > Not sure where put put it, but i find that one of the reasons bz is
> > hard to find duplicates in, are because the "devel" version under
> > "fedora core" product, for example, is not about bugs in current
> > rawhide, as expected, but has bugs that dates back to the "old days"
>  
>  I'm sorry? I was under the impression that FC->Devel was the category
>  tracking, well FC devel, which is what rawhide was some years ago.
>   
FC devel is still referred to as rawhide on many occations - but since 
test X releases are effectively snapshots of rawhide at a somewhat 
stable point in time, picking the right distribution for querying for 
already reported bugs becomes just a little less straight forward... All 
reports filed under FC devel are still there - even bugs reported 
against Pre FC 1 test releases... Again - recently released test X 
releases (pre FC5 for example) could just as well have had bugs 
repported against rawhide, since we're updating from the devel tree 
anyways, during the testing.

I'm merely suggesting that something could be done to make this a little 
clearer. I'll probably survive myself, but I have had the doubtful honor 
of filing a duplicate BZ or two (because i was not able to find the 
existing BZs, perhaps because of this).

/Thomas