bugzilla bugzappers?

Henrik Nordström henrik at henriknordstrom.net
Mon Nov 22 12:18:08 UTC 2010

fre 2010-11-05 klockan 21:37 +0100 skrev Michael Schwendt:

> Something is terribly wrong here, if reporter adjusts F12 -> F13 -> F14
> over a period of N months in reply to the automated NEEDINFO requests and
> still doesn't get any response other than another automated one after
> six more months.

Yes, if a maintainer do not react on a bug which the reporter actively
have reproduced in the next Fedora release before that release as well
is EOL then yes something is very wrong.

This is something we as a project should pick up and make sure it does
not happen, just as any other where reporter have provided feedback but
maintainer do not respond in reasonable time.

But it's really a separate issue from the bugzapper, just made more
obviously visible in that context.

> Look in the archives. It's not the first time I've criticized what this
> bugzapping script does. It has stopped me from filing lots of issues,
> both with regard to packaging bugs as well as other problems, because
> I simply cannot handle the flood of NEEDINFO requests.

Agreed, and mentioned some ideas how to mitigate that in another
response in this thread.

An alternative approach to what I suggested there would be to adjust the
flood by starting to nag the reporter much earlier to retest on those
reports where there is a newer version of the package available either
as an update or in next release. Probably only based on package Version
ignoring Release to avoid detecting mass rebuilds as new versions.


More information about the devel mailing list