Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Matt Turner <mattst88@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Cc: x11 <x11@g.o>
Subject: [gentoo-dev] Better way to direct upstream bugs upstream?
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 2015 19:54:24
1 In April I closed out ~100 bugs assigned to x11@ that the X11 team
2 never had any realistic ability to fix ourselves (see most bugs about
3 x11-drivers/ati-drivers). Most of these were fleeting driver bugs
4 affecting a particular piece of hardware and a (often now old)
5 particular version of the driver -- now long obsolete but still
6 cluttering our bugzilla and making triaging actually solvable bugs
7 more difficult.
9 We often direct reporters to file bugs upstream (being a middle-man
10 for a driver bug is extremely inefficient), but even when that happens
11 the Gentoo bug remains open, often long after the upstream bug is
12 fixed and closed.
14 Worse, users sometimes file bugs in our bugzilla that we don't have
15 time to respond to for a while during which time they're waiting on
16 people without the ability to help them.
18 Is there a better way of directing reporters to file bugs upstream? Of
19 course it's not always clear whether a bug is an ebuild bug or
20 something easily patched in Gentoo vs a driver bug that requires an
21 upstream developer...
23 Maybe some text on asking users
24 to direct bug reports upstream under some to-be-decided-upon
25 circumstances?


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Better way to direct upstream bugs upstream? Kent Fredric <kentfredric@×××××.com>
[gentoo-dev] Re: Better way to direct upstream bugs upstream? "Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn" <chithanh@g.o>