On 03/29/2010 02:11 PM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
On Monday 29 March 2010 14:03:51 Yaakov Nemoy wrote:
> 2010/3/29 MichaĆ Piotrowski<mkkp4x4(a)gmail.com>:
>> 2010/3/29 Oliver Falk<oliver(a)linux-kernel.at>:
>>> I had similar issues already and I totally agree with Christoph!
>>> The maintainer should not redirect the bugreporter to the upstream
>>> bugreporting plattform. I already have plenty of accounts on upstream
>>> bugzillas because of exactly this...
>>
>> I don't see any problem here if KDE SIG just declare "we don't fix
KDE
>> bugs, we just update packages".
>>
>> They are not KDE developers, so they don't know how to fix these bugs.
>
> This response regardless, as a downstream user of a package, if i
> report a bug, it's nice to know if it's going to be fixed in a current
> release or not. Until the upstream bugfix lands in a package
> downstream, downstream should leave the bug open.
Current Bugzilla policy says CLOSED as UPSTREAM is correct resolution. It's
just terminology - I would prefer another one - like just UPSTREAM status, or
ON_DEV UPSTREAM or something similar. CLOSED UPSTREAM does not mean that
nobody cares! It's still tracked!
Pardon, but I strongly have to disagree with this interpretation.
As a user, having been hit by a bug, "CLOSED UPSTREAM" is nothing but a
cheap bold lie packagers use as weak excuse to for not being able to fix
a bug having hit a user.
In other words: "FIXED UPSTREAM" does not fix anything for the user
struggling with a bug. It only helps the packager to keep his bug
statistics clean.
Analogous considerations apply to "FIXED RAWHIDE"
Both bugzilla tags should be banned.
Ralf