Re: [gentoo-project] The meaning of RESOLVED/UPSTREAM on bugzie

[William Hubbs]

On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 04:15:01PM +0200, Michał Górny wrote:
> On śro, 2017-03-29 at 16:01 +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> > > > > > > On Wed, 29 Mar 2017, Michał Górny wrote:
> > > I'd like to bring the problem of ambiguity of 'UPSTREAM' resolution
> > > on our Bugzilla to the discussion.
> > > While the resolution generically indicates an issue upstream, it is
> > > used differently by different developers, and sometimes even in a
> > > few meanings by a single developer. What's even worse, it is both
> > > used as a positive, neutral and negative resolution which renders it
> > > kinda meaningless as a classification criteria.
> > > [...]
> > > How would you feel about removing/disabling the UPSTREAM resolution,
> > > and expecting developers to use UPSTREAM keyword + regular
> > > resolution?
> > > Any other ideas?
> >
> > Use it in the sense as it is defined in Bugzilla?
> >
> > UPSTREAM
> >     The requested bug is considered to be out of the purview of the
> >     distro and should be submitted/discussed directly with the
> >     respective upstream project. This could include a number of things
> >     such as changing default configuration options or behavior, adding
> >     new options or functionality, or deleting support for older
> >     systems.
> >
> > IMHO it would be out of proportion to remove the field, just because
> > some developers don't use it as intended.
>
> What is your plan on making the developers use it correctly?

I'm with ulm on this, we shouldn't remove the resolution just because
developers haven't been using it correctly; that would be trying to
solve a social issue with a technical fix which would make future
resolutions invalid.

As I said in my other post, resolved/invalid = "this is not a bug.", but
resolved/upstream = "this is out of our scope as a distro, please
discussit with upstream."

They are slightly different meanings, but I think we should keep both of
them.

William