From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757653AbXKZAHK (ORCPT ); Sun, 25 Nov 2007 19:07:10 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755909AbXKZAG6 (ORCPT ); Sun, 25 Nov 2007 19:06:58 -0500 Received: from emailhub.stusta.mhn.de ([141.84.69.5]:45466 "EHLO mailhub.stusta.mhn.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755867AbXKZAG5 (ORCPT ); Sun, 25 Nov 2007 19:06:57 -0500 Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 01:06:44 +0100 From: Adrian Bunk To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: LKML , Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds , Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] Update REPORTING-BUGS Message-ID: <20071126000644.GA6538@stusta.de> References: <200711252157.10212.rjw@sisk.pl> <200711260000.28972.rjw@sisk.pl> <20071125231337.GB5006@stusta.de> <200711260104.25911.rjw@sisk.pl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200711260104.25911.rjw@sisk.pl> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Nov 26, 2007 at 01:04:25AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Monday, 26 of November 2007, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 26, 2007 at 12:00:28AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > On Sunday, 25 of November 2007, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > >... > > > > I don't care whether that's done with Bugzilla, some email based bug > > > > tracker like the Debian bug tracker, someone putting emails manually > > > > into some bug tracker like you are doing, or whatever else. > > > > > > That last solution doesn't scale very well ... > > > > > > How about using the system in which it's possible to report bugs using both > > > email and a web interface? > > > > > > We can request that the address of the bug tracker be added to the Cc lists of > > > bug reports sent by email and we can make it resend reports filed with it to > > > the appropriate mailing lists and with the appropriate email headers. This is > > > technically doable. > > > > You are trying to solve something that is not a problem. > > It _is_ a problem, because many bug are reported using email and not really > tracked. The ones that I manually put into the Bugzilla are the tip of the > iceberg (and BTW I'd prefer not to have to do that manually). > > Every bug reported by email and not responded to by the right people, that is > not a recent regression, is currently lost. I'd like to avoid that, if possible. This is solved by many other projects by asking the submitter to open a bug for the issue when he sends it in an email. The submitter then simply copies the information from his email to his newly opened bug in the bug tracker. -> no problem > > It does not matter which medium we choose for getting bug reports. > > [Well, you said that we should use a web interface for that. ;-)] I said a web interface is not worse than via email. And it's enough. (And I e.g. wouldn't oppose using the Debian bug tracker where the web interface only allows reading and everything has to be done via email if all kernel maintainers would agree to use this.) > No, it doesn't, as long as the bug reports reach the right place. Now, the > question is what's that. > > IMO, ideally, for each subsystem there should be a mailing list to send bug > reports to. The Bugzilla should forward the reports to these lists. On every > such list there should be (at least) one person responsible for responding to > the bug reports, if no one else responds first, and for forwarding the reports > to the appropriate developers. This person should also be responsible for > monitoring the status of each bug report sent to his/her list. After all discussions about crazy bug tracker features we are back at the real problem: Where do we find the tree these people grow on? > _Every_ bug report sent (including invalid ones) should be recorded in a bug > tracking system (be it the Bugzilla or whatever else) along with all of it's > history (at least, refernces to the bug's history should be stored), no matter > how it's been handled. Moreover, a bug can only be resolved as "fixed" if > there's a pointer to the exact commit fixing it in the bug's history. And back we are at crazy bug tracker features... > > The only thing that matters is that we get bug reports resolved within a > > reasonable amount of time. > > I'm not sure if that's generally possible: > - What about the bugs that take 2 weeks or more to reproduce? > - What about the bugs that we _don't_ _know_ how to fix? We will never get 100% of all bugs fixed. Let's get back to the fact that we have many bug reports that could be fixed within a reasonable amount of time but are not. > Rafael cu Adrian -- "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. "Only a promise," Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed