Moving away from reporting to RH bugzilla and adopting pure upstream reporting mantra.
dan at danny.cz
Tue Sep 24 06:45:34 UTC 2013
On Mon, 23 Sep 2013 19:07:04 -0400
Bill Nottingham <notting at redhat.com> wrote:
> Jan Wildeboer (jwildebo at redhat.com) said:
> > How will you track blocker bugs?
> > How can we see a global view of all open bugs? Aggregate from X
> > upstream bug report systems? Which not all are Bugzilla?
> > How can we track critical bugs?
> Additional concerns I'd have above this:
> - Not all things we ship have active upstream bug trackers to fall
> back on
> - We still need a way to track Fedora-specific integration & packaging
> concerns, which would likely get closed upstream as 'NOTABUG' for
> that project
> - What filing downstream gives the Fedora maintainer is a good
> mechanism for knowing what's going on in that package in Fedora.
> Tracking *all* upstream bugs in a bug tracker may not be a good way
> to do so.
> Honestly, I think a good dedicated triage team that works to verify
> and move upstream as appropriate works better. But, you know,
> requires getting and keeping such a team.
we are missing a tool that would clone the Fedora bugs from bugzilla to
upstream bug trackers. I think the removal of the manual work needed to
copy all the information from bugzilla to upstream tracker would be
appreciated by the packagers. I have the idea for the tool for quite
some time, but didn't find the time to realize it :-(
More information about the test