Separate Fedora bug tracker?

[Matt McCutchen]

On Thu, 2010-06-17 at 10:43 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-06-17 at 13:23 -0400, Matt McCutchen wrote:
> > I'm not sure what would be gained by having a fully separate Fedora bug
> > tracker.  On the other hand, there are definite practical conveniences
> > to having Fedora and RHEL in the same bug tracker: user accounts are
> > shared and direct dependencies can be entered among Fedora, RHEL, and
> > Security Response bugs.
> 
> Which most of the time are done wrong, which annoys the crap out of some
> of us. Me, at least.

Could you give an example?

> I hate having RHEL bugs depending on Fedora bugs
> (or vice versa) when there's no reason why they should...

The reason is that Fedora is the upstream for RHEL and Red Hat wishes to
fix the bug in Fedora first.  It makes sense to me.  The reverse would
be a mistake.

The current practice for Security Response bugs is a little complicated
and possibly not optimal, but it seems that it might be useful to have
some structure of dependencies between Security Response bugs and
corresponding Fedora/RHEL bugs.

-- 
Matt