bugzilla triage madness :-/

Michael Schwendt mschwendt at gmail.com
Sat Apr 5 12:43:02 UTC 2008

On Sat, 5 Apr 2008 11:36:42 +0000 (UTC), Kevin Kofler wrote:

> I think that instead of insulting the Triage Team's work, it would be more 
> productive to kindly ask them to help you triaging the bugs you reported 
> because they are too many for you to deal with (something which is obvious to 
> me at least, I know what a mountain of bugs looks like!). I am sure you can 
> work something out that way instead of creating bad air and sour grapes. Please 
> work with each other, not against each other!

Tell that the bot!

I mean it. Why the superfluous work? Where are the maintainers? Ah, I
remember, they are flooded with tickets and cannot handle them all. Then
why should I spend more time on re-evaluating defects again if there is no
guarantee that this time they will be fixed? Where in the protocol is the
person to work on the fix? Right, nowhere. The same [or new] maintainer may
decide to ignore the report again due to lack of time or lack of interest.
Till next time when I'll be asked to retest against F10.

I don't criticise that tickets are set to NEEDINFO with some cool-looking
"bzcl34nup" keyword applied to them. I criticise the plans to close
tickets after 30 days, because that is equal to hiding things under the
carpet. And it doesn't help with orphaned packages either. Look at
http://bugz.fedoraproject.org/plague for example. The packages are
unmaintained since FE6. What will happen if the NEEDINFO call is not
answered? The packages will remain broken and unmaintained. There are
other packages where the example would be valid, too.

More information about the devel mailing list