Just curious... not meant as any sort of criticism.... :-)
Is there a typical time frame from when a bug is closed/fixed in bugzilla, and the correction distributed via yum update?
In particular, I'm curious about a bug I opened against ftp, and provided a fix for...
If interested, see https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196103
Don
Don Russell wrote:
Just curious... not meant as any sort of criticism.... :-)
Is there a typical time frame from when a bug is closed/fixed in bugzilla, and the correction distributed via yum update?
It varies widely. Severity is one of the factors. Critical security updates and crashers for example are usually fixed much faster compared to other issues.
In particular, I'm curious about a bug I opened against ftp, and provided a fix for...
If interested, see https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196103
The bug is marked as closed in the current release. So a update should have been provided by now. If not reopen and claim. If a several bug is not being responded to, fedora-devel list would be a good place to ask.
Rahul
On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 07:59:07AM -0700, Don Russell wrote:
Is there a typical time frame from when a bug is closed/fixed in bugzilla, and the correction distributed via yum update?
Nope.
In particular, I'm curious about a bug I opened against ftp, and provided a fix for... If interested, see https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196103
This was closed as CURRENTRELEASE, but it appears the RH engineer chose that by mistake -- it's actually fixed in the development tree, not an update to the current release, so either NEXTRELEASE or RAWHIDE would have been correct.
I'm going to go ahead and change the resolution to RAWHIDE. However, if you believe this is an issue which really deserves an FC5 errata, you should reopen with a comment to that effect.
Matthew Miller wrote:
On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 07:59:07AM -0700, Don Russell wrote:
Is there a typical time frame from when a bug is closed/fixed in bugzilla, and the correction distributed via yum update?
Nope.
In particular, I'm curious about a bug I opened against ftp, and provided a fix for... If interested, see https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196103
This was closed as CURRENTRELEASE, but it appears the RH engineer chose that by mistake -- it's actually fixed in the development tree, not an update to the current release, so either NEXTRELEASE or RAWHIDE would have been correct.
I'm going to go ahead and change the resolution to RAWHIDE. However, if you believe this is an issue which really deserves an FC5 errata, you should reopen with a comment to that effect.
Thanks.... I reopened it asking if it could be released as an FC5 update.... it's not critical to me at this point, I've already worked around the issue with another solution. But, since there are no special requirements/dependencies for this fix, I don't see why it should wait until FC6 before being distributed. I don't necessarily expect it to be retrofitted to FC4,3,2 etc, but FC5 is "current" and I'd rather see fixes sooner than later. :-)