Bugzilla dupes attack

[Toshio Kuratomi]

On Tue, 2006-02-14 at 21:26 -0400, John DeDourek wrote:
> n0dalus wrote:
> 
> >On 2/15/06, Rahul Sundaram <sundaram at fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> >  
> >
> >>[...] I dont see this as improvement that affects triaging.
> >>
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >I think that any bugzilla improvements resulting in improved bug
> >reports or reduced numbers of duplicates should in turn increase
> >triaging efficiency.
> >
> >n0dalus.
> >
> >  
> >
> A related question from a "newbie".  If I think I have a bug in
> FC(n) and a search finds a remarkably similar bug in FC(n-1), be
> it OPEN, CLOSED, NEEDINFO_REPORTER, or whatever, filed by someone
> else, what should be my next step?

Good point.  If it's OPEN or NEEDINFO it's probably good to tack on to
the bug and say it's still present in FC(n), version x.y-z of the
package.  Sometimes "remarkably similar" is only in the eyes of the
reporter, though... I think Mike Harris has mentioned that he gets X
bugs where people with different chipsets but the same symptoms pile
onto the same bug report, making the eventual resolution of the bug next
to impossible.

If it's CLOSED, I'd say that opening a new bug (mentioning the previous
bug if you think there's a relationship) is my gut feeling.  Someone
else may have better reasoning that there's a better way to deal with
this though.

-Toshio
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20060214/662517d4/attachment.sig>