Moving away from reporting to RH bugzilla and adopting pure upstream reporting mantra.

Bob Lightfoot boblfoot at gmail.com
Tue Sep 24 04:26:51 UTC 2013


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 09/23/2013 05:49 PM, "J├│hann B. Gu├░mundsson" wrote:
> Greetings you all
> 
> After bit of irc discussion there is a compelling reason to move 
> entirely away from Red Hat bugzilla as well as away from concept
> of hosting our own.
> 
> Now it pretty much boils down to this.
> 
> 1. Generic attitude of many maintainers is that reports either go
> to the correct place ( upstream ) or they get their bugzilla
> ignored. 2. More often than not downstream maintainer as in
> packager does not know the code at all so filling the bug
> downstream makes no sense since it brings just unnecessary latency
> to the process. 3. Hosting our own bugzilla cost resources and does
> not solve 1. or 2.
> 
> I personally for many years have argued against this since to an 
> reporter it might mean having thousand of accounts  but given that
> we are going through new fase and the times are changing in the
> linux eco system I would like to get your opinion about we stop
> reporting altogether in Red Hat bugzilla and report only directly
> upstream as in kernel bugs to the kernel community, Gnome bugs to
> theirs, KDE to their etc.
> 
> The obvious benefit of doing this is that our bugs might actually
> get look at,dealt with as well as all that being done in a shorter
> time frame.
> 
> Thoughts and comment.
> 
> JBG
     To Date I've seen several posts, but feel it appropriate to
reiterate some of what I have read.  First I've been a computer
user/programmer for 39 years.  I've been a Fedora User since Fedora 6
and a test monkey of sorts since Fedora 11.  That said I still find it
confusing at Bugzilla to know what package to file bugs against.
     Recently I filed an F20 Bug because the Network Manager Icon did
not behave as expected.  Network Manager Icon so I filed against
NetworkManager.  Turns out the icon is contolled by some
gnome-nm-applet and the bug needed to be filed against that package.
Using RH Bugzilla the package maintainers knew this and rerouted the
bug which was addressed.
      In the world you suggest, I would have gone to NetworkManager
and opened a bz account there or tried to remember the one I had from
F18.  Then when I got a "it's not our problem" response, tried gnome's
bz and maybe have been directed to the applet bz.
       I can't begin to imagine how frustrating this will be for new
users.  When you choose distro X and it doesn't work you expect them
to at least take your report and assist you making their distro work,
whether the problem is theirs or upstreams or the users ineptitude.
       I am definitely opposed to a departure from the current bug
reporting methods, unless the new method can be fully automated, and
even then I would be skeptical.
       It may cost RH something to maintain BZ for Fedora in terms of
infrastructure and support personnel.  But trying to pass this buck to
upstream is a wrong move, IMHO.

Sincerely,
Bob Lightfoot
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSQRSLAAoJEKqgpLIhfz3XiKMIAIlEJrI9GwlOfQk2tnvo4b0S
QNZ19skZKXZ/ocEwTS41tRzcUzRTXIsfnhjvFLxa6p51vw1tmiFfV0EKt0XXqWeX
sbpcCF2Ks2oNXZaAPJS/eEwHNzvXnuJb/sPGfZhWStXsECZ8mdwZ9LSB1W13dUcj
jxegJ9yN0EbrJoqWQrIGp7AeDgo+GUgJnqi5yJeMHRMMEidn0A7FoNOLX8qWQG4t
8xoX82128b0YQbSex+HMP91BKcgqFnj7CYOau3e0zQdq63F9O1fuIWuM5jdvtqyR
+yis1IpvygyJfCOO+s9eXyL1y7l2TV/KskA7e77v2wHlEKEDzmySMq4veMkQOFY=
=gC+o
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


More information about the test mailing list