Fedora Extras vs. CLOSED RAWHIDE

Michael Schwendt fedora at wir-sind-cool.org
Tue Aug 3 18:10:30 UTC 2004


On Tue, 03 Aug 2004 18:03:15 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:

> On Tue, 2004-08-03 at 17:26, Alan Cox wrote:
> 
> > Or reopen/file a new bug when it does become important.

Who decides when it becomes important? Not seldomly, a single bug
reporter considers an issue as major bug. For instance, I don't consider
missing dependencies (e.g. fam-devel missing dependency on
libselinux-devel) a must-fix bug which should result in an immediate
update release. It's nice and helpful to get an update for such bugs,
though, especially when building a single extra package for multiple
target platforms (with CVS and automated builds you would laugh about
issues like that).

> bugzilla.redhat.com doesn't allow external (non-redhat.com) reporters to
> reopen such PRs.

I believe there are external people who can do that. But reopening a
report doesn't force the developer to change his mind. If there's
disagreement about whether to release an update, you would only step on
his feet and increase the amount of bugzilla spam. There ought to be
other ways how to discuss and resolve issues, and someone from a higher
instance of Fedora technical leadership people should be involved and
make sure the Fedora Project doesn't suck in this area.

> All one could do is to comment on a PR and politely ask the package
> maintainer to look into a the PR again, hoping he will listen :-/

True. With a close(r) relationship between Fedora Extras and Fedora Core,
it should not happen that easy-to-fix bugs in Fedora Core don't result in
an update when extra packages need it. Or vice versa (when Core updates
are not coordinated with Extras and break extra packages).





More information about the fedora-devel-list mailing list