Hi,
----- Original Message -----
There is liability and then there is our
community responsibility to work with the end-user on any bugs they
encounter. Fedora bears the latter, and will continue to do so, via
bugzilla. Obviously, this is without legal guarantees of any sort,
but to say "No entity is responsible" isn't really accurate.
This is
an interesting topic, and perhaps one that should be brought to the more general developer
list,
but i'll chime in here.
I see bugzilla has a vehicle for users in the community to contribute to the community by
providing insight into how the os is working.
It's a very important service those users provide. It helps us tract where the serious
problems are, and it helps us see the impact of bugs.
I don't see bugzilla as obligation for the package owner. The ratio of packages to
package owners, and bugs to package owners is really too big for that to be true. I'm
sure you've heard before and probably even said before the mantra "bugzilla
isn't a support forum". I see it as more of a way for a user to give something
back, than it is a way for a user to get something.
Furthermore, most bugs should go upstream. In gnome at least, almost every commit has to
have an upstream report associated with it, anyway, so the bugs should really start there.
The exception are bugs that block a release or have a big enough impact that they warrant
an asynchronous update.
Any packager on any component who doesn't make any attempt to
address
bugs in their Fedora component is likely to be removed from that
package.
That's 100% the wrong way to look at it. If there isn't enough
man power to deal with something, you don't take the man power that's there away.
You augment it. But I don't think the goal post should be every bug triaged,
investigated, and fixed. it's not realistic, and it's never been that way.
--Ray