On Mon, 3 Sep 2007, Richard Guenther wrote: > On Mon, 3 Sep 2007, Alberto Passalacqua wrote: > > > I suppose for the quality of GNOME it would be more helpful if people > > > would report issues upstream. At least if the perception is correct > > > that bugs in openSUSE GNOME are only fixed by pulling new releases > > > from upstream. > > > > That's ok, but it should have been clarified at the beginning of the > > development stage, I think. Now, 17 days before the release, it is > > probably too late to get them fixed for 2.20, which will be included in > > openSUSE 10.3. > > > > Moreover, on what basis should we distinguish between GNOME bugs to > > report upstream, and GNOME bugs to report on bugzilla? > > Usually for GCC (which is what I'm working on) I monitor the upstream > bugzilla for bugs affecting the openSUSE compiler as well as making > sure that bugs filed on the Novell bugzilla are forwarded upstream. > > This is ideally the way it should work for all bugs filed in Novell > bugzilla if there is upstream development and bugreporting infrastructure. > > To what extent this happens for GNOME bugs at the moment I don't know, > but I am sure that help from the community to improve the situation with > Novell-bugzilla-only bugreports would be appreciated. Maybe our > GNOME people can clarify their policy?
This looks like an other 10.1 fiasco. I really do not want to see a repeat of the mistakes. From what I see in bugzilla there are too many bugs to really release on schedule. I think the release needs to be postponded. -- Boyd Gerber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ZENEZ 1042 East Fort Union #135, Midvale Utah 84047 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
