Latest Fedora Core 3 status: kernel testing needed

Bryan W. Headley bwheadley at earthlink.net
Thu Oct 21 17:26:53 UTC 2004


John Dennis wrote:

>
>You're absolutely right. I think its well understood we could do a
>better job of bug triage and feedback, it often comes up in internal
>discussions. If we could only clone ourselves a few times ;-) Your
>concerns are heard. As we progress to more community access in Fedora
>(its happening!) it will hopefully allow a greater distribution of
>resources to bear on the issue and a commencement improvement.
>  
>
It's a matter of how Bugzilla is integrated into the process. I've seen 
BZ entries used to keep a conversation going between one-to-many bug 
wranglers, which IMHO isn't too useful (nor is everything put into the 
DB as artifacts hardly anything deserving of persistence)

A way to do this is to have a mapping between a Bugzilla report and a 
thread on the mailing list. The one allows for artifact 
gathering/reporting, the other is more ameniable to casual use, 
aggregation by thread, etc. Maybe a way of dealing with it is to have 
entry of reports/followup notices to be posted to the mailing list under 
the bug #/description's thread. Then, on a weekly or whatever basis, 
have the mailing lists' summary of message (by thread) entered as an 
artifact into Bugzilla. You obviously want it such that the user of one 
tool knows what's been done/discussed by users of the other tool (e.g., 
Bugzilla versus mail client)





More information about the test mailing list