Upstream bugs vs. Fedora bugs: KDE people do it wrong

[Yaakov Nemoy]

2010/3/29 Michał Piotrowski <mkkp4x4 at gmail.com>:
> 2010/3/29 Oliver Falk <oliver at linux-kernel.at>:
>> I had similar issues already and I totally agree with Christoph!
>> The maintainer should not redirect the bugreporter to the upstream bugreporting plattform. I already have plenty of accounts on upstream bugzillas because of exactly this...
>>
>
> I don't see any problem here if KDE SIG just declare "we don't fix KDE
> bugs, we just update packages".
>
> They are not KDE developers, so they don't know how to fix these bugs.

This response regardless, as a downstream user of a package, if i
report a bug, it's nice to know if it's going to be fixed in a current
release or not. Until the upstream bugfix lands in a package
downstream, downstream should leave the bug open. The bug can be used
to track an update from bodhi too, and even suggest to the user that
he download a package out of testing to see that it is fixed. Without
the maintainers acting as the man in the middle, a potential bug
reporter not only has to open an account with the KDE bug tracker, but
then he might be asked to download source code, build it on his own,
and do a number of other hassles to help upstream out. The maintainers
can assist this by helping with test builds and so on. It's their
responsibility, otherwise to track the issue upstream, regardless
whether they are active developers.

-Yaakov