Dave Jones wrote:
On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 01:14:44PM -0500, John Ellson wrote:
> Its incredibly frustrating and demoralizing to report a bug to Fedora,
> only to
> have the Fedora maintainer close the bug with the response that the user
> (what a dummy!) should have reported it upstream! Yes, this has
> happened to me.
> I propose that it be a policy that Fedora maintainers are themselves
> for forwarding the bug upsteam if necessary. At the same time the status
> of the Fedora bug can be left open with tracking information to the
> upstream bug.
In a lot of cases, users working directly with upstream instead of having
someone playing middle-man is going to get things turned around a lot
faster. Especially in cases where the bug relates to a specific piece
of hardware, for eg.
What would be *really* awesome would be the possibility of having
a facility in bugzilla to escalate a bug to upstream, so a couple of
clicks, and the bug is entered in the appropriate bugzilla, with
all comments being reflected back into the one the user entered the
bug into. I believe there is some work going on in this area, but
it's slow moving.
The bug that made me thinking about it was a bug in libwnck that I
noticed after the update yesterday. I checked the redhat bugzilla en the
gnome bugzilla, there weren't any reports about it. I checked the spec
file and there were no extra patches.
So this was abviously an upstream bug. I filed it upstream and about 2
hours later the maintainer had a patch and comitted it to cvs. Because
monday new tarballs were released it will take some time before they
will be in fedora I guess. So that's why I asked it here. Because it
could help saving the fedora maintainer some time.
Bart Vanbrabant <bart.vanbrabant(a)zoeloelip.be>
PGP fingerprint: 093C BB84 17F6 3AA6 6D5E FC4F 84E1 FED1 E426 64D1