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 1Ot73C-0002v6-IW for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 07 Sep 2010 22:54:02 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 37B1BE0EDA; Tue, 7 Sep 2010 22:53:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9FB6E0ED5 for ; Tue, 7 Sep 2010 22:53:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93DBF1B40B0 for ; Tue, 7 Sep 2010 22:53:43 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: -2.52 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.52 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=0.079, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id st-GfklMQXL1 for ; Tue, 7 Sep 2010 22:53:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lo.gmane.org (lo.gmane.org [80.91.229.12]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F0D21B4349 for ; Tue, 7 Sep 2010 22:53:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Ot72e-0004j3-TH for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Wed, 08 Sep 2010 00:53:28 +0200 Received: from ip68-231-22-224.ph.ph.cox.net ([68.231.22.224]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 08 Sep 2010 00:53:28 +0200 Received: from 1i5t5.duncan by ip68-231-22-224.ph.ph.cox.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 08 Sep 2010 00:53:28 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: RFC Bugzilla interaction guide for devs & editbugs users Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2010 22:53:22 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <20100907224727.5d6ccfae@amit.kihnet.sk> <20100907214459.GA11425@laptop> <1283897135.4629.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> 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=UTF-8 X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ip68-231-22-224.ph.ph.cox.net User-Agent: Pan/0.133 (House of Butterflies; GIT a971f44 branch-testing) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: f92ce7ed-4bb0-4dff-9096-eb0972778e2f X-Archives-Hash: 97268da63f39b558c15892062984fc83 Pacho Ramos posted on Wed, 08 Sep 2010 00:05:34 +0200 as excerpted: > El mi=C3=A9, 08-09-2010 a las 01:44 +0400, dev-random@mail.ru escribi=C3= =B3: >> On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 09:30:34PM +0000, Robin H. Johnson wrote: >> > This implies that the upstream is alive enough to fix it. >> >=20 >> > I feel it should mean that the bug has been reported to upstream, an= d >> > that state is documented in the bug. >> >=20 >> > If we keep every upstream bug open instead of closed, we'd have >> > probably another 2500 open bugs (5312 RESO/UPSTREAM in the history o= f >> > Gentoo, and I'm ballparking that 50% aren't actually fixed yet >> > upstream). >>=20 >> Bug may be a blocker. And marking it as RESOLVED/UPSTREAM you may >> unblock another bug (e.g. stabilization request) which should be still >> blocked because there is no fixed package in tree. >>=20 >>=20 > In most cases when it's really a blocker, bug will remain opened anyway > until solved or, if not possible, stabilization will be postponed. Additionally, RESOLVED/UPSTREAM indicates that the Gentoo package=20 maintainer (or other dev who marked it such) believes Gentoo is not the=20 appropriate place for a patch fixing the problem. As such, the bug will never be fixed at the Gentoo level, only upstream,=20 and if there's a blocker on it, the blocker would never get resolved=20 either, until upstream fixes it. Where upstream isn't active or doesn't=20 believe the fix appropriate either, that'd lead to stalemate and forever=20 blocking the dependent Gentoo bug. That's not appropriate either. So RESOLVED/UPSTREAM *should* unblock blockers, even where upstream=20 doesn't resolve, or we've simply created a deadlock that's not going to b= e=20 resolved. If it's truly a blocker, the problem will need worked around=20 some other way. But often, "blockers" really aren't blockers, when=20 upstream chooses not to take the package in that direction after all. It= =20 simply means some other alternative, perhaps an alternative package, must= =20 be developed instead, and the package as it is can continue to evolve in=20 the normal way. --=20 Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman