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

[Adam Williamson]

On Mon, 2010-03-29 at 14:20 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:

> As a user, having been hit by a bug, "CLOSED UPSTREAM" is nothing but a 
> cheap bold lie packagers use as weak excuse to for not being able to fix 
> a bug having hit a user.
> 
> In other words: "FIXED UPSTREAM" does not fix anything for the user 
> struggling with a bug. It only helps the packager to keep his bug 
> statistics clean.
> 
> Analogous considerations apply to "FIXED RAWHIDE"

It's CLOSED UPSTREAM and CLOSED RAWHIDE, not FIXED UPSTREAM and FIXED
RAWHIDE. CLOSED does not, necessarily, mean FIXED.

> Both bugzilla tags should be banned.

CLOSED RAWHIDE is intended to be used for...Rawhide. It would be silly
to ban it. What would we then close Rawhide bugs as?

The workflow page already says that closing bugs filed against stable
releases with the RAWHIDE resolution is not valid, and I do point this
out when I come across it. If the maintainer does not intend to fix the
bug in the stable release, it should be set to CLOSED WONTFIX (or CLOSED
CANTFIX) with an explanation of why, and a note that the fix is in
Rawhide.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
http://www.happyassassin.net