Linux Archive

Linux Archive (http://www.linux-archive.org/)
-   Ubuntu Masters Of The Universe (http://www.linux-archive.org/ubuntu-masters-universe/)
-   -   Needs Packaging bug reports (http://www.linux-archive.org/ubuntu-masters-universe/243537-needs-packaging-bug-reports.html)

Stefan Potyra 02-10-2009 09:47 PM

Needs Packaging bug reports
 
Hi Brian,

first off, why didn't you CC ubuntu-motu@l.u.c, who are most affected?

On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 02:18:56PM -0800, Brian Murray wrote:
> As a part of the managing needs-packaging bug reports specification[1]
[..]
>
> Barring any objections I plan on running this on the Friday the 13th,
> which will modify approximately 254 bug reports, and scheduling it to
> run weekly thereafter.

I strongly object to both the specification and the result of you
running that script.

Cheers,
Stefan.


--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu

Stefan Potyra 02-10-2009 09:47 PM

Needs Packaging bug reports
 
Hi Brian,

first off, why didn't you CC ubuntu-motu@l.u.c, who are most affected?

On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 02:18:56PM -0800, Brian Murray wrote:
> As a part of the managing needs-packaging bug reports specification[1]
[..]
>
> Barring any objections I plan on running this on the Friday the 13th,
> which will modify approximately 254 bug reports, and scheduling it to
> run weekly thereafter.

I strongly object to both the specification and the result of you
running that script.

Cheers,
Stefan.


--
ubuntu-devel mailing list
ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel

"Siegfried Gevatter (RainCT)" 02-10-2009 09:58 PM

Needs Packaging bug reports
 
2009/2/10 Stefan Potyra <sistpoty@ubuntu.com>:
> I strongly object to both the specification and the result of you
> running that script.

Could you please explain the reasons why you object to setting those
bugs to "wishlist"?


--
Siegfried-Angel Gevatter Pujals (RainCT)
Ubuntu Developer. Debian Contributor.

--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu

"Siegfried Gevatter (RainCT)" 02-10-2009 09:58 PM

Needs Packaging bug reports
 
2009/2/10 Stefan Potyra <sistpoty@ubuntu.com>:
> I strongly object to both the specification and the result of you
> running that script.

Could you please explain the reasons why you object to setting those
bugs to "wishlist"?


--
Siegfried-Angel Gevatter Pujals (RainCT)
Ubuntu Developer. Debian Contributor.

--
ubuntu-devel mailing list
ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel

Daniel Holbach 02-11-2009 04:43 AM

Needs Packaging bug reports
 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Stefan Potyra schrieb:
> I strongly object to both the specification and the result of you
> running that script.

If you object "strongly" it would help if you explained why.

Setting needs-packaging bugs to wishlist is what always has been done,
even if it was undocumented practice. Brian stepped up to the plate to
automate parts of the workflow and have a common approach to those bugs.
I appreciate his efforts there.

Daniel

- --
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/GlobalBugJam - 20-22 February 2009
Join in on the fun with YOUR team!
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkmSZWQACgkQRjrlnQWd1eu1EQCbBFmwLVXZRR 2ROtTMoRToex08
GQgAn295BnUawfo/azm0NoQf9ewE9Awx
=nO3t
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu

Daniel Holbach 02-11-2009 04:43 AM

Needs Packaging bug reports
 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Stefan Potyra schrieb:
> I strongly object to both the specification and the result of you
> running that script.

If you object "strongly" it would help if you explained why.

Setting needs-packaging bugs to wishlist is what always has been done,
even if it was undocumented practice. Brian stepped up to the plate to
automate parts of the workflow and have a common approach to those bugs.
I appreciate his efforts there.

Daniel

- --
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/GlobalBugJam - 20-22 February 2009
Join in on the fun with YOUR team!
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkmSZWQACgkQRjrlnQWd1eu1EQCbBFmwLVXZRR 2ROtTMoRToex08
GQgAn295BnUawfo/azm0NoQf9ewE9Awx
=nO3t
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
ubuntu-devel mailing list
ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel

Fabian Rodriguez 02-11-2009 12:15 PM

Needs Packaging bug reports
 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Brian Murray wrote:
> As a part of the managing needs-packaging bug reports specification[1]
> it was decided that all needs-packaging bug reports should have an
> importance of wishlist. Subsequently, I've written a script using the
> Launchpad API that will set the importance of almost all needs-packaging
> bugs to wishlist.
>

I see some needs-packaging bug reports will not be given enough
importance if this change goes through. For example:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/120576

As a bug reviewer I'd probable go back and make this kind of bug
Importance: Medium.

About the script, it'd be nice if it also checks for consistency and
adds the needs-packaging tag to bugs that have [needs-packaging] in
their subject and vice versa.

Cheers,

- --
Fabián Rodríguez, FSF #3877
http://wiki.ubuntu.com/MagicFab
Montreal, QC, Canada



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: PGP/Mime available upon request
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkmSz10ACgkQfUcTXFrypNU+sACgyNnpF2OH7Q VYkSzaQzBLMTDO
7OkAnjSuPxsPNXvYBPZ6GIjsgfGfhCea
=La4E
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
ubuntu-devel mailing list
ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel

Emmet Hikory 02-11-2009 03:03 PM

Needs Packaging bug reports
 
Fabian Rodriguez wrote:
> Brian Murray wrote:
>> As a part of the managing needs-packaging bug reports specification[1]
>> it was decided that all needs-packaging bug reports should have an
>> importance of wishlist. Subsequently, I've written a script using the
>> Launchpad API that will set the importance of almost all needs-packaging
>> bugs to wishlist.
>
>
> I see some needs-packaging bug reports will not be given enough
> importance if this change goes through. For example:
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/120576
>
> As a bug reviewer I'd probable go back and make this kind of bug
> Importance: Medium.

Why would this be "Medium"? In general, we've historically taken
the attitude that Ubuntu is (mostly) complete, and adding new things,
while possibly desirable, does not represent a measurable defect in the
existing system (hence Wishlist). As much as some needs-packaging bugs
are probably more important than others, I'm not sure that this
variation is best tracked as bugs, and believe that Wishlist accurately
reflects the defect concerned when these requests are tracked as bugs.

That said, there exist a class of bugs that are meaningful defects
(e.g. spellchecker cannot handle Canadian English) which might be best
solved by adding a new package, but I'm not sure we want to track the
defect and the desire for the package the same way. In the specific
case of 120576, I'd probably consider the OpenOffice task Medium, but
the Ubuntu needs-packaging task Wishlist. Moreso, in this case, I'm not
sure how 120576 is not duplicate to 44100. We probably ought determine
how we want to track these pairs better: are they duplicates? Should
one be used to track the problem, and the other the addition of a new
package as a solution?

In some ideal world, we'd have a more comprehensive workflow for
package requests, where requestors would register the request along with
the upstream URL and license information. This would then receive
manual review by someone, who would draft debian/copyright and
debian/watch to pull the file. These approved packages would then be
available in a queue for people to add debian/control, debian/rules, and
debian/copyright (along with any other supplemental files), which would
then feed into something like REVU. While there's no reason that the
same person couldn't do both these things, initial verification of the
licensing and setup of the watch file are things which typically do not
require the same level of knowledge of packaging as the control or rules
files. Such a system could ideally be referenced from Malone to
indicate that a potential solution for a bug exists as packaging work in
progress, and perhaps reference Malone to indicate which bugs are
attempted to be fixed by the inclusion of a package.

Unfortunately, this requires someone to design and administer such a
system, and migration of current outstanding requests. Until then, we
use bugs, and as they aren't really defects, we give them an importance
of Wishlist, although we may prioritise certain packages to meet other
goals (either planned feature goals or to address discovered defects
that manifest in another package).

--
Emmet HIKORY

--
ubuntu-devel mailing list
ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel

Brian Murray 02-11-2009 06:34 PM

Needs Packaging bug reports
 
On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 11:47:29PM +0100, Stefan Potyra wrote:
> Hi Brian,
>
> first off, why didn't you CC ubuntu-motu@l.u.c, who are most affected?

I've viewed the ubuntu-devel mailing list a superset of the ubuntu-motu
mailing list and thought mailing the one list would be sufficient rather
than cross posting.

> On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 02:18:56PM -0800, Brian Murray wrote:
> > As a part of the managing needs-packaging bug reports specification[1]
> [..]
> >
> > Barring any objections I plan on running this on the Friday the 13th,
> > which will modify approximately 254 bug reports, and scheduling it to
> > run weekly thereafter.
>
> I strongly object to both the specification and the result of you
> running that script.

I'm interested to hear and discuss your objections to both of these.

--
Brian Murray @ubuntu.com
--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu

Brian Murray 02-11-2009 06:34 PM

Needs Packaging bug reports
 
On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 11:47:29PM +0100, Stefan Potyra wrote:
> Hi Brian,
>
> first off, why didn't you CC ubuntu-motu@l.u.c, who are most affected?

I've viewed the ubuntu-devel mailing list a superset of the ubuntu-motu
mailing list and thought mailing the one list would be sufficient rather
than cross posting.

> On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 02:18:56PM -0800, Brian Murray wrote:
> > As a part of the managing needs-packaging bug reports specification[1]
> [..]
> >
> > Barring any objections I plan on running this on the Friday the 13th,
> > which will modify approximately 254 bug reports, and scheduling it to
> > run weekly thereafter.
>
> I strongly object to both the specification and the result of you
> running that script.

I'm interested to hear and discuss your objections to both of these.

--
Brian Murray @ubuntu.com
--
ubuntu-devel mailing list
ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:28 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.