Reporting bugs upstream

[Horst von Brand]

Michael Schwendt <fedora at wir-sind-cool.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 05:37:40 -0500, Mike A. Harris wrote:
> >  > I propose that it be a policy that Fedora maintainers are themselves
> >  > responsible for forwarding the bug upsteam if necessary.
> 
> Good proposal.
>  
> > That does sometimes happen, but it is not something a bug reporter
> > should expect to happen.  Red Hat engineering manpower is a limited
> > resource, and our man hours are prioritized across quite a number
> > of tasks.  The amount of work that any given engineer "has" to do,
> > plus the amount of work that they could "potentially" do (such as
> > various random bugzilla bug reports), plus various meetings, and
> > other things that fill the day, is generally many times more than
> > the hours available.
> 
> Have you ever before thought about this from the user's perspective?

[...]

> As a user, being confronted with "just another feature-overloaded bug
> tracker" which contains many new and poorly named and insufficiently
> described "products" and "components" and hundreds of open bug reports, it
> is a very frustrating experience to spend time on _trying_ to help by
> reporting something upstream only to learn that the report is ignored or
> closed as duplicate or closed as NOTOURBUG or not been looked at for
> many months.

Why not adopt some packages, and help out by keeping an eye on bugzilla for
them, trying to reproduce bugs, and kick them upstream as needed? That way
you don't have to learn about many upstream bug trackers, just a few.
-- 
Dr. Horst H. von Brand                   User #22616 counter.li.org
Departamento de Informatica                     Fono: +56 32 654431
Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria              +56 32 654239
Casilla 110-V, Valparaiso, Chile                Fax:  +56 32 797513