closing out old bugs of unmaintained releases
 

On 04.01.2008 19:45, Jon Stanley wrote:
> I can put some time this weekend into closing out old bugs, however,
> before doing so, I wanted to make sure that our messaging is crystal
> clear. [...]

Just FYI: Similar mass-closures for bugs in EOL releases were done in
the Fedora-past two or three times already (or more often -- can't
remember); that was decided and guided by FESCo iirc. If you ask on
fedora-devel-list you might get some experiences from people that did
the job back then and blessing from FESCo now.

Cu
knurd

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board

closing out old bugs of unmaintained releases
 

Jon Stanley said the following on 01/04/2008 10:45 AM Pacific Time:

I can put some time this weekend into closing out old bugs, however,
before doing so, I wanted to make sure that our messaging is crystal
clear. What I had been doing for kernel bugs is placing them in
NEEDINFO_REPORTER and asking if the problem still existed, etc after
manually reviewing the bugs (some I changed to a current release
because it was mentioned in comments, but not in the version
metadata). However, this won't scale - there's no way that I or
anybody else can reasonably review 3600 bugs for ones that are
incorrectly tagged. This leaves us with ~9000 bugs (F7, F8, and
rawhide) to deal with (still a monumental task). I propose doing
something similar with rawhide bugs that haven't been touched in ~6
months, not sure of the number of those, haven't looked yet. Here's
the proposed comment to WONTFIX these. I want to get the most input
possible before doing this:

<begin>
Hello,

Thank you for taking the time to report this bug. Unfortunately, this
version of Fedora has reach end-of-life and is no longer maintained.
Please refer to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/LifeCycle for an
explanation of the Fedora lifecycle policy.

We therefore regret the necessity of closing this bug report WONTFIX.
Please upgrade to a currently maintained release of Fedora, currently
either Fedora 7 or Fedora 8, and attempt to reproduce this bug. If
the bug still exists, feel free to re-open this bug report, changing
the version accordingly, or file a new bug report (you can use the
'Clone as Bug' link at the top of this bug report in order to preserve
the content of this bug in the new one).

We regret any inconvenience that this may cause you, and thank you for
your continued support of Fedora!
<end>

I propose starting with FC6, since that recently reached EOL and
people would be understanding about it (hopefully).
Comments/thoughts/suggestions/flames welcome.



I think this is good! Probably best to roll this into an overall
proposal that we could review at FUDCon and in the meantime float it by
fedora-devel list and fedora-test-list to get some community feedback
and buyin.


John

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board

closing out old bugs of unmaintained releases
 

On Fri, 2008-01-04 at 20:47 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> On 04.01.2008 19:45, Jon Stanley wrote:
> > I can put some time this weekend into closing out old bugs, however,
> > before doing so, I wanted to make sure that our messaging is crystal
> > clear. [...]
>
> Just FYI: Similar mass-closures for bugs in EOL releases were done in
> the Fedora-past two or three times already (or more often -- can't
> remember); that was decided and guided by FESCo iirc. If you ask on
> fedora-devel-list you might get some experiences from people that did
> the job back then and blessing from FESCo now.

I'd recommend bending over backward with a mass closing comment so that
people aren't put off -- some will, inevitably, but we should do what we
can to salve hurt feelings. How about adding:

"The Fedora Project is undergoing a revitalization of its bug triage
program, staffed for the main part by volunteers. We are committed to
addressing bugs in a timely and courteous fashion, and we thank you for
the time you have taken to file bugs. Please be assured your Fedora
experience matters to us, and we hope you will enjoy all the
innovations, features, and improvements we have provided in the latest
release."

Seems a little sycophantic, but let's keep in mind the old adage about
flies and honey.

--
Paul W. ("silver-tongued devil") Frields http://paul.frields.org/
gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
Fedora Project: http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug
_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board

closing out old bugs of unmaintained releases
 

On 01/04/2008 09:08 PM, Paul W. Frields wrote:

Seems a little sycophantic, but let's keep in mind the old adage about
flies and honey.


LIES! http://xkcd.com/357/

:-)

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board

closing out old bugs of unmaintained releases
 

Thorsten Leemhuis pÃ*Å¡e v Pá 04. 01. 2008 v 20:47 +0100:
> Just FYI: Similar mass-closures for bugs in EOL releases were done in
> the Fedora-past two or three times already (or more often -- can't
> remember); that was decided and guided by FESCo iirc. If you ask on
> fedora-devel-list you might get some experiences from people that did
> the job back then and blessing from FESCo now.

See my yesterday's message -- we do it now for desktop bugs as a matter
of policy.

Matěj
--
http://www.ceplovi.cz/matej/blog/, Jabber: ceplma<at>jabber.cz
GPG Finger: 89EF 4BC6 288A BF43 1BAB 25C3 E09F EF25 D964 84AC

If it dies, it's biology. If it blows up, it's chemistry,
and if it doesn't work, it's physics.
-- University bathroom graffito

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board

closing out old bugs of unmaintained releases
 

On Fri, 2008-01-04 at 21:18 +0100, Christopher Aillon wrote:
> On 01/04/2008 09:08 PM, Paul W. Frields wrote:
> > Seems a little sycophantic, but let's keep in mind the old adage about
> > flies and honey.
>
> LIES! http://xkcd.com/357/
>
> :-)

Now, I *KNOW* you di'n't go dissin' my Moms. :-D

--
Paul W. ("sweater++, cold--") Frields http://paul.frields.org/
gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
Fedora Project: http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug
_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board

closing out old bugs of unmaintained releases
 

On Fri, 2008-01-04 at 13:45 -0500, Jon Stanley wrote:
> I can put some time this weekend into closing out old bugs, however,
> before doing so, I wanted to make sure that our messaging is crystal
> clear.

I've got a better idea. Let's just close _all_ the non-packaging bugs,
even current ones, with a message such as the following:

This is a bug in the software, not the packaging. This needs to
be reported to the $PACKAGE author, not to me, the Fedora
packager.

Wouldn't that be a great thing for Fedora? We could reduce the bug count
to almost zero overnight!

--
dwmw2

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board

closing out old bugs of unmaintained releases
 

On 05.01.2008 13:04, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-01-04 at 13:45 -0500, Jon Stanley wrote:
>> I can put some time this weekend into closing out old bugs, however,
>> before doing so, I wanted to make sure that our messaging is crystal
>> clear.
>
> I've got a better idea. Let's just close _all_ the non-packaging bugs,
> even current ones, with a message such as the following:
> This is a bug in the software, not the packaging. This needs to
> be reported to the $PACKAGE author, not to me, the Fedora
> packager.
> Wouldn't that be a great thing for Fedora? We could reduce the bug count
> to almost zero overnight!

A +0.66 from me

In fact, something like the above is what I always do and did for my
packages (and had to do, as I'm a package-monkey and no developer).

IOW: if it's not a packaging bug or otherwise specific to Fedora I asked
the reported to report the bug upstream, as the bug gets fixed for
everyone then -- that includes other distributions and thus is the best
for everyone and avoid double work in our current world with
fivehundred-and-more distributions. If the reported didn't forward the
bug upstream I did it if the bug looked worth forwarding.

But only +0,66 and not +1 here, because we ship some packages with quite
a lot of patches -- kernel and part from the Xorg-stack for example
afaics. For those packages Fedora's bugzilla likely needs to remain the
first point for a report as long as we ship intrusive patches.

Just my 2 cent.

Cu
knurd

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board

closing out old bugs of unmaintained releases
 

On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 13:28:32 +0100
Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora@leemhuis.info> wrote:

> In fact, something like the above is what I always do and did for my
> packages (and had to do, as I'm a package-monkey and no developer).
>
> IOW: if it's not a packaging bug or otherwise specific to Fedora I
> asked the reported to report the bug upstream, as the bug gets fixed
> for everyone then -- that includes other distributions and thus is
> the best for everyone and avoid double work in our current world with
> fivehundred-and-more distributions. If the reported didn't forward the
> bug upstream I did it if the bug looked worth forwarding.

Except that as a maintainer it's one of your responsibilities to do
some of the upstream filing/tracking.

--
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- All my bits are free, are yours?
_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board

closing out old bugs of unmaintained releases
 

On Sat, 2008-01-05 at 07:47 -0500, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 13:28:32 +0100
> Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora@leemhuis.info> wrote:
>
> > In fact, something like the above is what I always do and did for my
> > packages (and had to do, as I'm a package-monkey and no developer).
> >
> > IOW: if it's not a packaging bug or otherwise specific to Fedora I
> > asked the reported to report the bug upstream, as the bug gets fixed
> > for everyone then -- that includes other distributions and thus is
> > the best for everyone and avoid double work in our current world with
> > fivehundred-and-more distributions. If the reported didn't forward the
> > bug upstream I did it if the bug looked worth forwarding.
>
> Except that as a maintainer it's one of your responsibilities to do
> some of the upstream filing/tracking.

And also to help the user debug, and to provide a fix where possible.
Where would Fedora be if at least the majority of packagers didn't do
that, and didn't actually work on the upstream codebase?

I'll tell you where -- we'd be just another one of the second-rate
distributions, packaging the software which other people work on, rather
than setting our own goals and innovating.

--
dwmw2

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board