On Mon, 19 Dec 2005, Christian Boltz wrote:
> > On Sat, 17 Dec 2005, Eberhard Moenkeberg wrote:
> [...]
> > > > High priority item: bugzilla for packages, including community
> > > > stuff
> > >
> > > But you can already enter your bugs into bugzilla.
> >
> > ... but as of now bugzilla.novell.com is only used to track bugs for
> > packages that are maintained by Novell / SUSE. Having a central place
> > to track bugs for all packages that are available for SUSE Linux would
> > be preferable IMHO.
>
> I fully agree, but I see one problem: How do you avoid that the SUSE
> developers will have to handle all bugs in communitiy packages?
>
> It might be easy to tell for packages that are not in the core
> distribution (you still may have to re-assign bugs), but if someone
> creates a modified Apache/KDE/whatelse package, things will become more
> difficult.
True. On option would be to take a hidden header tag into account:
rpm -q --qf "%{DISTURL}\n" bash
ATM this is an way to find out if the package was built by the build
service and to which repo it belongs.
> I also have an idea how this could be solved: Use the packager field in
> the RPMs - it now contains http://www.suse.de/feedback for all suse
> packages [1].
If you look at the latests SUSE packages, you won't find suse.de/feedback
anylonger. We already changed this like to "http://bugs.opensuse.org/"; ;)
> What about putting a direct bugzilla link into the packager field?
> Someone who wants to file a bugreport should be able to call rpm -qi ;-)
>
> Example URL for packager field:
> https://bugzilla.novell.com?enter_bug.cgi?product=SUSE%20Linux%2010.0&package=apache2&version=2.0.50-150&packager=cboltz
>
> "product", "package" and "version" should be quite obvious and, even if
> not always necessary, can show the packagers package and version even if
> the user enters a "bad" bug report.
>
> "packager" could just be the Novell login name of the packager - and of
> course the default assignee for the bug.
>
> What do you think about this idea?
Sure, this could be an option.
> BTW: I guess it would be a bad idea to have a separate bugzilla for
> packages from $build_service - I can imagine that several bugs in
> modified packages also exist in the original package. Having everything
> in one bugzilla means that a packager can CC the bug to the SUSE
> maintainer etc. which would be more difficult with a separate bugzilla.
I'm pretty confident that this won't happen ;)
Regards
Christoph
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
