Forgive me for my comments, but let me backtrack a little on the email
chain a little and make a comment here...
I see that Ursula said there's a policy to get teams added to the
bugsquad team if they're upstream teams. That's not exactly correct,
you probably meant "bugcontrol" based on the sent
Hi,
whilst I'm still keeping my head down; I've forwarded this to Nicholas as
there has been conversation of merging QA and bug team and I think he
should be aware of the conversation.
Kindest regards,
Phill.
On 30 November 2013 06:06, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Hi Michał,
>
> On Wed, Nov 27, 2
Hi Michał,
On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 10:33:00AM +0100, Michał Sawicz wrote:
> On 26.11.2013 02:44, Ursula Junque wrote:
> >If upstreams don't oppose to that, bugs should only be filed against
> >Ubuntu packages, discouraging the direct upstream reporting. Once we
> >have an agreement, we need to doc
hi,
On Fr, 2013-11-29 at 10:11 +0100, Michał Sawicz wrote:
> On 27.11.2013 19:06, Ursula Junque wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 7:33 AM, Michał Sawicz
> > mailto:michal.saw...@canonical.com>> wrote:
>
> > I just tried to file a bug against Ubuntu (unity8)¹, unfortunately I
> > can't
On 27.11.2013 23:09, Luke Faraone wrote:
See https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuBugControl#Requirements_for_Teams
Yeah, exactly. There's a lot of "required"s and "must"s there, that I'm
not comfortable to comply with/enforce for my team just for the sake of
us being able to triage bugs for the few
On 27.11.2013 19:06, Ursula Junque wrote:
On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 7:33 AM, Michał Sawicz
mailto:michal.saw...@canonical.com>> wrote:
I just tried to file a bug against Ubuntu (unity8)¹, unfortunately I
can't set the status to 'Triaged', or decide the importance. So,
well... I can'
On 27 November 2013 13:06, Ursula Junque wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 7:33 AM, Michał Sawicz <
> michal.saw...@canonical.com> wrote:
>
>> On 26.11.2013 02:44, Ursula Junque wrote:
>>
>>> If upstreams don't oppose to that, bugs should only be filed against
>>> Ubuntu packages, discouraging t
Hello,
On 26 November 2013 08:58, Sergio Schvezov wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 5:56 AM, Thomi Richards <
>> thomi.richa...@canonical.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 2:44 PM, Ursula Junque wrote:
>>>
If upstreams don't oppose to that, bugs should only be filed against
>>>
On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 5:50 PM, Sergio Schvezov <
sergio.schve...@canonical.com> wrote:
> Totally out of thread, but
>
> http://summit.ubuntu.com/uds-1308/meeting/21840/community-1308-quality-reporting-bugs/
> with
>
> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/community-1308-quality-reporting
Totally out of thread, but
http://summit.ubuntu.com/uds-1308/meeting/21840/community-1308-quality-reporting-bugs/
with
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/community-1308-quality-reporting-bugs
and then
http://summit.ubuntu.com/uds-1308/meeting/21857/foundations-1308-click-error-reporting
On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 7:33 AM, Michał Sawicz
wrote:
> On 26.11.2013 02:44, Ursula Junque wrote:
>
>> If upstreams don't oppose to that, bugs should only be filed against
>> Ubuntu packages, discouraging the direct upstream reporting. Once we
>> have an agreement, we need to document this to prev
On 26.11.2013 02:44, Ursula Junque wrote:
If upstreams don't oppose to that, bugs should only be filed against
Ubuntu packages, discouraging the direct upstream reporting. Once we
have an agreement, we need to document this to prevent all the confusion
to happen again, and then discuss what to do
hi,
Am Dienstag, den 26.11.2013, 22:33 -0600 schrieb Ted Gould:
> I think that points out the core of the issue. Several of the
> projects that Canonical develops, that are used in Ubuntu Touch, are
> used by other interfaces/spins/etc. Really, it would be much better
> if the Ubuntu Touch bugs w
On Tue, 2013-11-26 at 15:55 +0100, Michał Sawicz wrote:
> On 26.11.2013 14:54, Ursula Junque wrote:
> > I started a wiki page to document this information [1]. There's an old
> > page [2] that probably should be revisited and merged with this one.
> >
> > While this isn't settled, I'd like to ask
On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 5:55 PM, Thomi Richards <
thomi.richa...@canonical.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 4:07 AM, Ursula Junque wrote:
>
>> Is there a tool we could use to transition upstream bugs to distro bugs,
>>> then? I'm all for having a single bug list - at least until there
On 26 November 2013 13:58, Sergio Schvezov
wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 9:34 AM, Ursula Junque wrote:
>>
>> Hi Thomi,
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 5:56 AM, Thomi Richards
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 2:44 PM, Ursula Junque
>>> wrote:
If upstre
Hi,
On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 4:07 AM, Ursula Junque wrote:
> Is there a tool we could use to transition upstream bugs to distro bugs,
>> then? I'm all for having a single bug list - at least until there's other
>> consumers of a project than Ubuntu.
>
>
> Not that I'm aware of but I think this ca
Am Dienstag, den 26.11.2013, 11:54 -0200 schrieb Ursula Junque:
> I started a wiki page to document this information [1]. There's an old
> page [2] that probably should be revisited and merged with this one.
>
>
> While this isn't settled, I'd like to ask people that file bugs to add
> a tag refe
On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 12:55 PM, Michał Sawicz wrote:
> On 26.11.2013 14:54, Ursula Junque wrote:
>
>> I started a wiki page to document this information [1]. There's an old
>> page [2] that probably should be revisited and merged with this one.
>>
>> While this isn't settled, I'd like to ask pe
On 26.11.2013 14:54, Ursula Junque wrote:
I started a wiki page to document this information [1]. There's an old
page [2] that probably should be revisited and merged with this one.
While this isn't settled, I'd like to ask people that file bugs to add a
tag referring to the image version where
On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 9:34 AM, Ursula Junque wrote:
> Hi Thomi,
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 5:56 AM, Thomi Richards <
> thomi.richa...@canonical.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 2:44 PM, Ursula Junque wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> If upstreams don't oppose to that, bugs should only b
I started a wiki page to document this information [1]. There's an old page
[2] that probably should be revisited and merged with this one.
While this isn't settled, I'd like to ask people that file bugs to add a
tag referring to the image version where the issue was found, e.g. bug
found at image
On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 5:56 AM, Thomi Richards
wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 2:44 PM, Ursula Junque wrote:
>>
>>
>> If upstreams don't oppose to that, bugs should only be filed against
>> Ubuntu packages, discouraging the direct upstream reporting.
>
> I think the distinction betwee
Hi Thomi,
On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 5:56 AM, Thomi Richards <
thomi.richa...@canonical.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 2:44 PM, Ursula Junque wrote:
>
>>
>> If upstreams don't oppose to that, bugs should only be filed against
>> Ubuntu packages, discouraging the direct upstream rep
On 26 November 2013 09:10, Oliver Grawert wrote:
> hi,
> Am Dienstag, den 26.11.2013, 20:56 +1300 schrieb Thomi Richards:
>
>
>> I also believe that the correct place for almost all bugs to be filed
>> is against the upstream projects itself (at least, for the core
>> Canonical/Ubuntu projects - I
hi,
Am Dienstag, den 26.11.2013, 20:56 +1300 schrieb Thomi Richards:
> I also believe that the correct place for almost all bugs to be filed
> is against the upstream projects itself (at least, for the core
> Canonical/Ubuntu projects - I assume we're having this conversation in
> the context of
Hi,
On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 2:44 PM, Ursula Junque wrote:
>
> If upstreams don't oppose to that, bugs should only be filed against
> Ubuntu packages, discouraging the direct upstream reporting.
>
I think the distinction between upstream and distro is a useful one, and
I'd be sad if we started
Hi all,
There was a long discussion this afternoon on #ubuntu-ci-eng about the
policy to file bugs when dogfooding Ubuntu Touch. We noticed some bugs were
being filed only against upstream projects, and this caused at least one
regression bug to go unnoticed in this latest image. That happened bec
28 matches
Mail list logo
