Bugzilla Status (pitiful, penoso, penible, bedauerlich)

Bugzilla Status (pitiful, penoso, penible, bedauerlich)

[Andrea Adami]

Bump

;-)

Re: Bugzilla Status (pitiful, penoso, penible, bedauerlich)

[Koen Kooi]

On 25-03-09 11:14, Andrea Adami wrote:
> Bump

As I said, let's close it down.

regards,

Koen

Re: Bugzilla Status (pitiful, penoso, penible, bedauerlich)

[Vitus Jensen]

On Wed, 25 Mar 2009, Koen Kooi wrote:

> On 25-03-09 11:14, Andrea Adami wrote:
>>  Bump
>
> As I said, let's close it down.

And create new Bugzillas for the different distributions relying on 
openembedded?

Bye,
   Vitus

-- 
Vitus Jensen, Hannover, Germany, Universe (current)

Re: Bugzilla Status (pitiful, penoso, penible, bedauerlich)

[Michael 'Mickey' Lauer]

Am Mittwoch, den 25.03.2009, 12:04 +0100 schrieb Koen Kooi:
> On 25-03-09 11:14, Andrea Adami wrote:
> > Bump
> 
> As I said, let's close it down.

-1000. Lets continue cleaning it up.

:M:

Re: Bugzilla Status (pitiful, penoso, penible, bedauerlich)

[Philip Balister]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 710 bytes --]

Vitus Jensen wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Mar 2009, Koen Kooi wrote:
> 
>> On 25-03-09 11:14, Andrea Adami wrote:
>>>  Bump
>>
>> As I said, let's close it down.
> 
> And create new Bugzillas for the different distributions relying on 
> openembedded?

Funny, I think we just had a similar discussion while talking about stable.

We need to think about who is responsible for collecting bug reports 
from end-users and how to get the fixes into the meta-data. In the end, 
it the the distro maintainers job to work through end  user issues.

Sometimes, it is confusing where the OE/distro border is.

I do not think this is a perfect solution, but it merits some thought 
and discussion.

Philip

[-- Attachment #2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature, Size: 3303 bytes --]

Re: Bugzilla Status (pitiful, penoso, penible, bedauerlich)

[Cliff Brake]

On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 8:49 AM, Michael 'Mickey' Lauer
<mickey@vanille-media.de> wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, den 25.03.2009, 12:04 +0100 schrieb Koen Kooi:
>> On 25-03-09 11:14, Andrea Adami wrote:
>> > Bump
>>
>> As I said, let's close it down.
>
> -1000. Lets continue cleaning it up.

Building on Chris's push for package maintainers -- perhaps we need to
insist on style guidelines for bugs as well where we prefix the bug
title with the component name (like repo commits), or create separate
components for every directory in recipes, machines, and perhaps a
catch-all for core files.  Then the maintainer for the component could
decide if the bug is valid, and close it if not.  If bugs collect for
a component, and nothing gets done, then we need to search for a
maintainer, or mark the recipe unmaintained.  I guess the difficult
part is all this needs active management.  Somehow if we can get bugs
assigned to the right people (listed in the maintainers file), then
maybe it would work better.

Cliff

-- 
=======================
Cliff Brake
http://bec-systems.com

Re: Bugzilla Status (pitiful, penoso, penible, bedauerlich)

[Michael 'Mickey' Lauer]

On Friday 27 March 2009 15:19:39 Cliff Brake wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 8:49 AM, Michael 'Mickey' Lauer
>
> <mickey@vanille-media.de> wrote:
> > Am Mittwoch, den 25.03.2009, 12:04 +0100 schrieb Koen Kooi:
> >> On 25-03-09 11:14, Andrea Adami wrote:
> >> > Bump
> >>
> >> As I said, let's close it down.
> >
> > -1000. Lets continue cleaning it up.
>
> Building on Chris's push for package maintainers -- perhaps we need to
> insist on style guidelines for bugs as well where we prefix the bug
> title with the component name (like repo commits), or create separate
> components for every directory in recipes, machines, and perhaps a
> catch-all for core files.  Then the maintainer for the component could
> decide if the bug is valid, and close it if not.  If bugs collect for
> a component, and nothing gets done, then we need to search for a
> maintainer, or mark the recipe unmaintained.  I guess the difficult
> part is all this needs active management.  Somehow if we can get bugs
> assigned to the right people (listed in the maintainers file), then
> maybe it would work better.

Good thinking. I actually love the GNOME folks bugzilla interface. They run 
you through a set of questions / choices. That way it takes a bit longer to 
create a bug but it's more structured.

:M:

Re: Bugzilla Status (pitiful, penoso, penible, bedauerlich)

[Philip Balister]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1720 bytes --]

Michael 'Mickey' Lauer wrote:
> On Friday 27 March 2009 15:19:39 Cliff Brake wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 8:49 AM, Michael 'Mickey' Lauer
>>
>> <mickey@vanille-media.de> wrote:
>>> Am Mittwoch, den 25.03.2009, 12:04 +0100 schrieb Koen Kooi:
>>>> On 25-03-09 11:14, Andrea Adami wrote:
>>>>> Bump
>>>> As I said, let's close it down.
>>> -1000. Lets continue cleaning it up.
>> Building on Chris's push for package maintainers -- perhaps we need to
>> insist on style guidelines for bugs as well where we prefix the bug
>> title with the component name (like repo commits), or create separate
>> components for every directory in recipes, machines, and perhaps a
>> catch-all for core files.  Then the maintainer for the component could
>> decide if the bug is valid, and close it if not.  If bugs collect for
>> a component, and nothing gets done, then we need to search for a
>> maintainer, or mark the recipe unmaintained.  I guess the difficult
>> part is all this needs active management.  Somehow if we can get bugs
>> assigned to the right people (listed in the maintainers file), then
>> maybe it would work better.
> 
> Good thinking. I actually love the GNOME folks bugzilla interface. They run 
> you through a set of questions / choices. That way it takes a bit longer to 
> create a bug but it's more structured.

Bugzilla came up in the IRC stable branch meeting. Basically, who is the 
audience for the OE bugzilla? Distro users? Distro's should really set 
up their own bug reporting system.

I'm not sure what the real answer is here, but we should put some effort 
into deciding who the intended users of bugzilla are, and make sure we 
meet their needs.

Philip

[-- Attachment #2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature, Size: 3303 bytes --]

Re: Bugzilla Status (pitiful, penoso, penible, bedauerlich)

[Cliff Brake]

2009/3/27 Philip Balister <philip@balister.org>:
>
> Bugzilla came up in the IRC stable branch meeting. Basically, who is the
> audience for the OE bugzilla? Distro users? Distro's should really set up
> their own bug reporting system.

It seems that we need to use fewer tools well, rather than create yet
more places for people to find information.  I would rather see all
(most) of the distro users agree on how to use one bug tracking
system, as they are are really part of the same project
(OpenEmbedded).

> I'm not sure what the real answer is here, but we should put some effort
> into deciding who the intended users of bugzilla are, and make sure we meet
> their needs.

Agreed.



-- 
=======================
Cliff Brake
http://bec-systems.com

Re: Bugzilla Status (pitiful, penoso, penible, bedauerlich)

[Rolf Leggewie]

Cliff Brake wrote:
> Somehow if we can get bugs
> assigned to the right people (listed in the maintainers file), then
> maybe it would work better.

I agree, but it was heavily frowned upon when I assigned bugs to people. 
  The compromise was cc'ing them instead.  I agree a sense of 
responsibility for certain parts would make it easier to slice and dice 
the tasks into more manageable pieces that people may feel an urge to 
actually do something about.

Re: Bugzilla Status (pitiful, penoso, penible, bedauerlich)

[Frans Meulenbroeks]

2009/3/29 Rolf Leggewie <no2spam@nospam.arcornews.de>:
> Cliff Brake wrote:
>>
>> Somehow if we can get bugs
>> assigned to the right people (listed in the maintainers file), then
>> maybe it would work better.
>
> I agree, but it was heavily frowned upon when I assigned bugs to people.
>  The compromise was cc'ing them instead.  I agree a sense of responsibility
> for certain parts would make it easier to slice and dice the tasks into more
> manageable pieces that people may feel an urge to actually do something
> about.

It is just a matter of policy and understanding.
For me if I were to get a bug assigned, I would interpreted it as:
"hey soneone found a bug and perhaps you are the right person to look
into it".
If it was not for me, or I cannot fix it, I'd just give it back (and
probably also if I don't have time or am not interested, however if
that last thing happens often, then maybe you should not be a
maintainer)

Frans.