On Mon, 2013-09-23 at 18:17 -0700, Bob Arendt wrote:
The Fedora bugzilla, even if occasionally non-responsive, is
*very* convenient. One can at least see if other users are
experiencing the same issue. And other Fedora users cat
at least leave bug comments that might aid other users
(even
На 24.09.2013 02:44, Jonathan Kamens написа:
2) Most Fedora users are not developers. If they have to jump through hoops to
figure out where to report bugs, then they won't report the bugs. The one-stop
shop that Red Hat bugzilla provides as a point of entry for all bugs that users
encounter in
On Mon, 23 Sep 2013 19:07:04 -0400
Bill Nottingham nott...@redhat.com wrote:
Jan Wildeboer (jwild...@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
That said, I regret having to tell you that your plan is dumb, naive, and far
from being workable.
Ralf
That said, I regret having to tell you that insulting the OP instead of
pointing out relevant arguments is dumb, naive and far from being helpful.
;-)
Jan
--
Jan H Wildeboer
On 09/24/2013 10:25 AM, Jan Wildeboer wrote:
That said, I regret having to tell you that your plan is dumb, naive, and far
from being workable.
That said, I regret having to tell you that insulting the OP instead of
pointing out relevant arguments is dumb, naive and far from being
On 09/24/2013 03:10 AM, Jonathan Kamens wrote:
On 09/23/2013 10:03 PM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
On 09/24/2013 01:45 AM, Michal Jaegermann wrote:
This absolutely does not scale from a POV of a user reporting bugs.
Well neither does it do so from developer standpoint that also has to
On 09/24/2013 05:50 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
Exactly, users are reporting bugs against a product called Fedora,
not against another party's product called package.
In that sense it's a Fedora package maintainer's duty to arbitrate
processing bug reports and communicate them to appropriate
On 09/24/2013 06:45 AM, Dan Horák wrote:
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
On 09/24/2013 05:24 AM, Frank Murphy wrote:
On Mon, 23 Sep 2013 21:49:23 +
Jóhann B. Guðmundsson johan...@gmail.com 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
On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 09:53:46AM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
On 09/24/2013 06:45 AM, Dan Horák wrote:
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
On 09/24/2013 09:17 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 09/24/2013 10:25 AM, Jan Wildeboer wrote:
That said, I regret having to tell you that your plan is dumb,
naive, and far from being workable.
That said, I regret having to tell you that insulting the OP instead
of pointing out relevant
On 23.09.2013 23:49, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson 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
On 09/24/2013 10:45 AM, Mateusz Marzantowicz wrote:
Great idea, but how would one know all that upstream bug tracker URLs
for all packages that are shipped with Fedora?
Is there any tag in RPM package spec file that could be used to provide
such information and are you planning to extend
On Tue, 24 Sep 2013 09:51:52 +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
[...] this should be packagers responsibility they
themselves are suppose to triage their component and act accordingly by
either gather the required information and forward it upstream but the
reality is quite different more
On 09/24/2013 11:22 AM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
_Why_ are they in no communication with upstream?
?
Because there is no requirement for them doing so when they become
maintainers for a given package nor is it being ensured if package is
orphaned that the maintainer that takes it over is in
On 09/24/2013 05:46 AM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
Given that this would the direction we take for the next 10 years for
the QA community
On what basis do you assert that if we were to decide today to continue
to use RHBZ to track Fedora bugs, we would be locked into that decision
for the
On 09/24/2013 11:45 AM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
There is no such rough split between package (co-)maintainers and
the QA community. I don't even know how you define the QA community.
Those that participate in QA community activity testing/reporting etc.
--
test mailing list
On 09/24/2013 12:19 PM, Jonathan Kamens wrote:
. In fact, there are four stakeholders: QA, packagers, upstream, and
users. What efforts are being made to solicit useful feedback from all
four groups?
?
There are 2 stake holders in this
1 QA Community ( which includes reporters ) 2 the
On Tue, 24 Sep 2013 12:28:18 +
Jóhann B. Guðmundsson johan...@gmail.com wrote:
On 09/24/2013 12:19 PM, Jonathan Kamens wrote:
. In fact, there are four stakeholders: QA, packagers, upstream,
and users. What efforts are being made to solicit useful feedback
from all four groups?
?
On Mon, 2013-09-23 at 19:07 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
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
On 09/24/2013 12:30 PM, Frank Murphy wrote:
On Tue, 24 Sep 2013 12:28:18 +
Jóhann B. Guðmundsson johan...@gmail.com wrote:
On 09/24/2013 12:19 PM, Jonathan Kamens wrote:
. In fact, there are four stakeholders: QA, packagers, upstream,
and users. What efforts are being made to solicit
On Tue, 24 Sep 2013 12:36:08 +
Jóhann B. Guðmundsson johan...@gmail.com wrote:
Infra is not maintaining any bugzilla instances RH is and infra has
refused to put up project's own instance so I'm not sure what you
are getting at.
JBG
So, basically you want users to go find the
On 09/24/2013 12:41 PM, Frank Murphy wrote:
So, basically you want users to go find the bugzilla,
I can see how the will help keep the distro running,
unless you just want QA, and Packagers only using it.
For one, I won't be signing up to every site to track bugs,
if bz is broke, help fix it!
On Tue, 24 Sep 2013 12:29:04 +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
There is no such rough split between package (co-)maintainers and
the QA community. I don't even know how you define the QA community.
Those that participate in QA community activity testing/reporting etc.
That includes
On Tue, 24 Sep 2013 12:44:02 +
Jóhann B. Guðmundsson johan...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm not sure what that response is supposed to be adding to the
discussion since it's a well known fact the discomfort it brings to
reporters to have them go upstream to report.
I've added it because have
On 09/24/2013 08:28 AM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
On 09/24/2013 12:19 PM, Jonathan Kamens wrote:
. In fact, there are four stakeholders: QA, packagers, upstream, and
users. What efforts are being made to solicit useful feedback from
all four groups?
There are 2 stake holders in this
1 QA
On 09/24/2013 06:17 AM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
I comprehend very well what I'm proposing
Frankly, I don't think you do.
( given I've been on the same side of the fence that reporters are for
the last 5 years or more )
Oh, so now we're trotting out credentials to make our case? How about
On 09/24/2013 12:50 PM, Frank Murphy wrote:
On Tue, 24 Sep 2013 12:44:02 +
Jóhann B. Guðmundsson johan...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm not sure what that response is supposed to be adding to the
discussion since it's a well known fact the discomfort it brings to
reporters to have them go upstream
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09/24/2013 02:44 PM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
I'm not sure what that response is supposed to be adding to the
discussion since it's a well known fact the discomfort it brings
to reporters to have them go upstream to report.
On a more
On 09/24/2013 09:05 AM, jwild...@redhat.com wrote:
Fedora isn't just upstream-slapped-with-a-specfile. As a distribution
the resposibility is more complex:
Yes, I already made that point yesterday; see
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2013-September/117874.html.
Jóhann has
On 09/24/2013 01:00 PM, Jonathan Kamens wrote:
Oh, so now we're trotting out credentials to make our case
No I was just making the point that I have been the nr1 arguing against
what I'm proposing now for many years so I'm aware of all the
inconvenience it will bring reporters.
You can go
On Tue, 24 Sep 2013 13:04:18 +
Jóhann B. Guðmundsson johan...@gmail.com wrote:
I've added it because have stated bugs go unanswered.
That is the problem need fixing, not bugzilla.
There are 4 reasons that happens.
1. the packager is gone awol
1a: Not a buzilla problem, housekeeping
On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 09:46:51AM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
So from my point of view we wont be gathering reports from novices
end users in 10 years time.
This is a plain self-fulfilling prophecy. If you will manage to kill
report gathering means then indeed you will have no
On Sep 24, 2013, at 12:45 AM, Dan Horák d...@danny.cz wrote:
we are missing a tool that would clone the Fedora bugs from bugzilla to
upstream bug trackers.
I agree. Auto populating upstream bug reporting with some percentage of
spurious bugs that are not their bugs still puts the bug in
On Sep 24, 2013, at 4:07 AM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 09:53:46AM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
On 09/24/2013 06:45 AM, Dan Horák wrote:
we are missing a tool that would clone the Fedora bugs from bugzilla to
upstream bug trackers. I think the
On 09/24/2013 03:48 PM, Michal Jaegermann wrote:
On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 09:46:51AM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
So from my point of view we wont be gathering reports from novices
end users in 10 years time.
This is a plain self-fulfilling prophecy. If you will manage to kill
report
On Tue, 24 Sep 2013 18:35:46 +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
Really...
Let's run a simple query against bugzilla for bugs in the status NEW (
as in not looked at )
NEW doesn't imply not looked at. And it doesn't imply no response either.
--
test mailing list
On Tue, 24 Sep 2013, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
Really...
Let's run a simple query against bugzilla for bugs in the
status NEW ( as in not looked at ) and find out the oldest
report from our reporters ...
What does a count of the number of bug reports have to do with
the bug tracker
As Michael Schwendt has pointed out, NEW implies neither that the bug
hasn't been looked at nor that there has been no activity on it.
Russ Herrold is also correct: if bugs are not being looked at, then
that's not the fault of the bug-tracking system, it's the fault of the
people who are
On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 02:03:23AM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
On 09/24/2013 01:45 AM, Michal Jaegermann wrote:
This absolutely does not scale from a POV of a user reporting bugs.
Well neither does it do so from developer standpoint that also has
to maintain downstream distribution
On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 06:35:46PM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
On 09/24/2013 03:48 PM, Michal Jaegermann wrote:
On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 09:46:51AM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
So from my point of view we wont be gathering reports from novices
end users in 10 years time.
This
On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 09:55:40 +,
\Jóhann B. Guðmundsson\ johan...@gmail.com wrote:
The jury is not out on that infra has already stated that we wont be
having our own bug tracker due to lack of man power which means we
cannot implement something like our own badges etc for reporting
On 09/24/2013 06:42 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Tue, 24 Sep 2013 18:35:46 +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
Really...
Let's run a simple query against bugzilla for bugs in the status NEW (
as in not looked at )
NEW doesn't imply not looked at. And it doesn't imply no response either.
Matthias Clasen (mcla...@redhat.com) said:
I don't think all packages are the same when it comes to bug reporting.
Speaking just for GNOME, I will say that getting feedback (in the form
of bugs and crash reports) from rawhide and the 'next' branch during the
development cycle is pretty
On 09/24/2013 07:28 PM, Darryl L. Pierce wrote:
On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 06:35:46PM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
On 09/24/2013 03:48 PM, Michal Jaegermann wrote:
On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 09:46:51AM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
So from my point of view we wont be gathering reports
On 09/24/2013 07:33 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 09:55:40 +,
\Jóhann B. Guðmundsson\ johan...@gmail.com wrote:
The jury is not out on that infra has already stated that we wont be
having our own bug tracker due to lack of man power which means we
cannot implement
On 09/24/2013 07:17 PM, Jonathan Kamens wrote:
As Michael Schwendt has pointed out, NEW implies neither that the bug
hasn't been looked at nor that there has been no activity on it.
Russ Herrold is also correct: if bugs are not being looked at, then
that's not the fault of the bug-tracking
On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 07:55:44PM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
Out of how many total bugs? Simply reported 8k bugs without a comparison
tells us nothing.
Considering that Fedora is roughly 120 months old, that's about 66 bugs
per month closed. That out of how many packages? That's,
On 2013-09-24 19:55 (GMT) Jóhann B. Guðmundsson composed:
Considering that Fedora is roughly 120 months old, that's about 66 bugs
per month closed. That out of how many packages? That's, roughly, less
than 1 bug per package ever that's been closed as wontfix. (meaningless,
but think about it)
Jóhann,
I do not think you are participating in this discussion with your mind
open to the possibility that you may be wrong.
People have offered many reasons why they think what you are proposing
is a bad idea. You have failed to acknowledge the possibility that any
of those arguments
Once upon a time, Jonathan Kamens j...@kamens.us said:
Rather, it feels to me like
you've already made up your mind and are just putting on a show of
listening to other people's opinions before going ahead and doing
what you wanted to do all along.
If you have read Jóhann's previous posts, he
On 09/24/2013 09:14 PM, Jonathan Kamens wrote:
Jóhann,
I do not think you are participating in this discussion with your mind
open to the possibility that you may be wrong.
People have offered many reasons why they think what you are proposing
is a bad idea. You have failed to acknowledge
On 09/24/2013 09:21 PM, Chris Adams wrote:
Once upon a time, Jonathan Kamens j...@kamens.us said:
Rather, it feels to me like
you've already made up your mind and are just putting on a show of
listening to other people's opinions before going ahead and doing
what you wanted to do all along.
If
On Tue, 24 Sep 2013 21:34:49 +
Jóhann B. Guðmundsson johan...@gmail.com wrote:
...snip...
The reason for it is that infra has made it clear that we will not
have our own bugzilla instance
Let me provide a more detailed answer, just exactly like the one I
provided on the infrastructure
On 09/24/2013 10:07 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
We do modify accounts all the time.
(How do you think fedorabugs works?)
I needed to migrate all of my bugs to another account tied to one of my
email address then delete it ( old work account ) and that was not possible
JBG
--
test mailing list
On 09/24/2013 10:07 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
Again, if you want to be productive could you detail the exact pain
points you have and we can try and alleviate them with RH bugzilla
team.
Unlimited unhindered hacking access to bugzilla for one, an full
disclosure of the RH administrative policy
On 09/24/2013 10:07 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
which I would summarize as:
- You asked about us running our own bugzilla.
- We mentioned we have been thinking about this and pointed to the
above wiki page.
- We noted at this time that we aren't wanting to do so, but are happy
to hear more
On Sep 23, 2013 3:49 PM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson johan...@gmail.com 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
On Tue, 24 Sep 2013 22:12:48 +
Jóhann B. Guðmundsson johan...@gmail.com wrote:
I needed to migrate all of my bugs to another account tied to one of
my email address then delete it ( old work account ) and that was not
possible
I would think you could simply do a search for the critera
On Mon, 2013-09-23 at 21:49 +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson 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
On 09/23/2013 04:49 PM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson 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
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?
Jan
--
Jan H Wildeboer|
EMEA Open Source Affairs | Office: +49 (0)89 205071-207
Red
On 09/23/2013 10:43 PM, nonamedotc wrote:
While I do think this is a good idea, I am a few immediate concerns on
which I would request a bit more information/guidance -
1. What if a bug is due to a specific combination libraries or builds
in Fedora and not necessarily an upstream issue?
Jan Wildeboer (jwild...@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
On 09/23/2013 10:59 PM, Jan Wildeboer wrote:
How will you track blocker bugs?
Given that we are the ones filling them that's should not be an hard
issue to overcome.
How can we see a global view of all open bugs? Aggregate from X upstream bug
report systems? Which not all are Bugzilla?
On 09/23/2013 11:07 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Jan Wildeboer (jwild...@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
This is as bad of an idea now as it has been every previous time it has
been suggested.
1) Many of the bugs which get filed against Fedora are just that, Fedora
bugs, not bugs in upstream packages. Missing file in a package? Fedora
bug. Package linked against the wrong version? Fedora bug.
What to do when someone discovers what is clearly a problem but neither he
nor anyone reading his report here or on devel list can tell whether the bug
is in kernel, driver, xorg, gnome/kde/xfce/etc. or something else?
--
The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant
words are
On Mon, 23 Sep 2013 23:21:13 +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
On 09/23/2013 11:07 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
- Not all things we ship have active upstream bug trackers to fall back on
What do you think that tells us about the thing we are shipping?
Nothing. There are large projects as
On 09/23/2013 11:55 PM, Felix Miata wrote:
What to do when someone discovers what is clearly a problem but
neither he nor anyone reading his report here or on devel list can
tell whether the bug is in kernel, driver, xorg, gnome/kde/xfce/etc.
or something else?
Well I'm pretty sure upstream
On 09/23/2013 07:58 PM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
On 09/23/2013 11:55 PM, Felix Miata wrote:
What to do when someone discovers what is clearly a problem but
neither he nor anyone reading his report here or on devel list can
tell whether the bug is in kernel, driver, xorg,
On 09/23/2013 04:58 PM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
On 09/23/2013 11:55 PM, Felix Miata wrote:
What to do when someone discovers what is clearly a problem but neither he nor
anyone reading
his report here or on devel list can tell whether the bug is in kernel, driver,
xorg,
On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 09:49:23PM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
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.
...
Thoughts and comment.
This absolutely does not scale from a POV of
On 09/24/2013 01:45 AM, Michal Jaegermann wrote:
This absolutely does not scale from a POV of a user reporting bugs.
Well neither does it do so from developer standpoint that also has to
maintain downstream distribution bugzilla accounts.
Basically the amount of work and the effort are on
On 09/23/2013 10:03 PM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
On 09/24/2013 01:45 AM, Michal Jaegermann wrote:
This absolutely does not scale from a POV of a user reporting bugs.
Well neither does it do so from developer standpoint that also has to
maintain downstream distribution bugzilla accounts.
Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
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.
I don't chant that mantra.
I am a Fedora consumer, not a maintainer or programmer. My bug reports
to bugzilla
On Mon, 23 Sep 2013 21:49:23 +
Jóhann B. Guðmundsson johan...@gmail.com 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.
There is also a thread on infra
On 09/23/2013 11:49 PM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson 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
On 09/24/2013 03:45 AM, Michal Jaegermann wrote:
On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 09:49:23PM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
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.
...
Thoughts and
79 matches
Mail list logo
