From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1OuY5f-0000lu-Uh for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 11 Sep 2010 21:58:32 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0F2CDE0A84; Sat, 11 Sep 2010 21:58:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.t-com.sk (mylady.t-com.sk [213.81.152.142]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E69D1E0A70 for ; Sat, 11 Sep 2010 21:58:07 +0000 (UTC) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-2 Received: from amit.localdomain ([unknown] [78.99.239.142]) by relay1.stonline.sk (STOnline ESMTP Server) with ESMTPA id <0L8L00511ROUU700@relay1.stonline.sk> for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Sat, 11 Sep 2010 23:58:07 +0200 (CEST) Received: by amit.localdomain (Postfix, from userid 1000) id AEB828B7949; Sat, 11 Sep 2010 23:58:05 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sat, 11 Sep 2010 23:58:05 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-2?B?UvNiZXJ0IMhlcvJhbnNr/Q==?= To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC Bugzilla interaction guide for devs & editbugs users Message-id: <20100911235805.7be1ff29@amit.kihnet.sk> In-reply-to: <20100910183238.11a96a69@epia.jer-c2.orkz.net> References: <20100907224727.5d6ccfae@amit.kihnet.sk> <20100910183238.11a96a69@epia.jer-c2.orkz.net> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.6 (GTK+ 2.20.1; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: a5f1f920-8a26-4d54-b9ff-003fdf6276e3 X-Archives-Hash: 9e8a638d3a39f14e2ede63a33c8a067b On Fri, 10 Sep 2010 18:32:38 +0200 Jeroen Roovers wrote: > On Tue, 7 Sep 2010 21:30:34 +0000 > "Robin H. Johnson" wrote: >=20 > > On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 10:47:27PM +0200, R=F3bert =C8er=F2ansk=FD wrot= e: > > > 2.3. Upstream issues > > > Do not close a bug (as RESOLVED/UPSTREAM) until it is fixed by > > > upstream. >=20 > If the reason you propose this is visibility, then maybe we should > make the quicksearch option include more than just open bugs. I've > thought about having UPSTREAM/DUPLICATE/INVALID added so that Visibility, I would say is kind of derived problem. Visible or not, currently the RESOLVED/UPSTREM state does not tell whether a bug is fixed (in gentoo) or not. =46rom a user point of view even an upstream bug is a bug in software that is part of gentoo distribution and I think the right way to deal with it would be to report it further to upstream by gentoo develpers, and close in gentoo once fixed version gets to the tree (of course users (most likely the reporter of a bug) can be asked to help and report bug by themselves). Just let bugzilla reflect the _realilty_, that's the right foundation to other issues as well I think (like visibility, dependency and so on). Yes we might end up with another 2500 bugs open but if that's the reality then let them be. Why pretend that they arn't there? However, to leave such bugs open as if they would be non-upstream ones is probably also not a good idea. I would imagine that a developer wants to see only those bugs that he can work on while on upstream ones he can not do anything. Therefore we need a new state that would represent "open upstream" bugs (EXPORTED/UPSTREAM perhaps). Robert --=20 Robert Cernansky E-mail: hslists2@zoznam.sk Jabber: hs@jabber.sk