F8 kernel-2.6.24.3-12.fc8

[Josh Boyer]

On Mon, 10 Mar 2008 13:44:21 -0700
Andrew Farris <lordmorgul at gmail.com> wrote:

> Josh Boyer wrote:
> > On Mon, 10 Mar 2008 18:54:54 +0000
> > "Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange at redhat.com> wrote:
> > 
> >> On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 02:50:15PM -0400, Chuck Ebbert wrote:
> >>> On 03/10/2008 02:36 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
> >>>> On Mon, 2008-03-10 at 14:15 -0400, Chuck Ebbert wrote:
> >>>>> People should file bugs instead of just posting a comment in Bodhi.
> >>>>> Bodhi does not provide the same features as bugzilla for tracking
> >>>>> problems -- for example this weekend we had one person in Bodhi
> >>>>> posting the same -1 karma message three times in a row...
> >>>> Why not both?  Reference the bug in a karma posting.
> >>>>
> >>> Negative karma postings should require a bug number...
> >> Absolutely. We shouldn't be using Bohdi to track bugs against updates - they
> >> should all be in BZ. And if we're going to allow -ve karma to revert a bug
> >> fix, then it must be accompanied by a bug report indicating what's wrong.
> > 
> > I've filed an RFE for this:
> > 
> > https://fedorahosted.org/bodhi/ticket/181
> > 
> > josh
> 
> This might be better overall, but I just want to point out it is definitely 
> going to increase the barrier of getting people to use bodhi, which (due to this 
> thread) is apparently not being used by testers enough as it is.
> 
> I would think it is better to have a field users *may* add a bug number to their 
> comment, so those with the motivation do, but requiring it is probably going to 
> reduce the negative karma postings.

Fair points.  The RFE is open for discussion and it's exact
implementation will likely need to reflect the results of bringing the
overall proposal to FESCo.

If we want to be overachievers, then we can make bodhi talk to bugzilla
and dump the user into a new bug report immediately before/after doing
a negative karma comment.

josh