Help me triage

[Jon Stanley]

On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 7:30 PM, John Poelstra <poelstra at redhat.com> wrote:

> # Is there a general policy around using perl in pre/post ?
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=462996

Not that I'm aware of, I'll check the guidelines and that particular bug.

> # Should this be considered a blocker?  Do we have any requirements about
> being able to build all packages from source before GA?
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=462971

Matt Domsch regularly rebuilds rawhide in mock to catch things like
this and auto-files bugs (FTBFS bugs). This was filed by a normal
person, and fixed by the maintainer a few days later. FESCo has or is
voting on at some point (I forget which) a policy that items that
don't build from source by the time of beta get dropped.  There was
some backlash, since some of the items took very long dependency
chains with them. Therefore I think it's more like "drop a leaf" type
policy now.

Either way, not a release blocker :)

> # Is this bug filed against the right component?  What else could I request
> to help troubleshoot this bug?
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=463044

This doesn't appear to be filed against the correct version - note all
of the .fc9 packages that he's talking about. Looks more like a
hardware problem to me, though.
>
> # what kind of debug information to advise?
> # Should pulse audio really have these kind of problems due to removing
> libfalshsupport?
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=463108

I don't think that should b0rk PA, the maintainer has requested
additional info here :)
>
> # does anyone have a labeled USB disk handy that could try this?
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=463106

Not off the top, sure I could make one.

> # How should we be triaging "branch" and other CVS type requests ?
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=463105
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=463397
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=463175
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=463139

Make sure that they have the fedora-cvs? flag set, and cvsadmin's will
get to it, most likely in a matter of hours.

> # This CVS request has comment saying "it is done".  Can bug be closed or
> where can I check to help verify and then close bug?
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=463124
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=463105
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=463175

If they are package reviews, and CVS is done, the maintainer may wish
to use them for bodhi updates or something.  If it's an EPEL branch or
something, then I guess close it.

> # sounds like an F10Blocker, but I'm not familiar with what PackageKit
> should or should not do or what it used to do
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=463566

Sounds more like notting making a note to himself.

> # Should we exclude the component "fedora-packager" from our queries of bugs
> to triage?
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=463397

This is a misfiled bug -  that should have a completed package review :)

> # is this critical enough to be a blocker?
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=463054
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=463048
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=463047

Dunno.....have to look at em :)
>
> # This bug is assigned to a defunct email address... how will this bug be
> addressed?
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=462671

That package was orphaned and picked up by the current maintainer,
whose address is not defunct :)