tix for docs tasks (was BTW Guys)

Karsten Wade kwade at redhat.com
Sat Jun 16 19:03:49 UTC 2007

On Wed, 2007-06-13 at 08:39 -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote:

> 2.  The right answer to flying requests is "If it's not in Bugzilla, it
> doesn't exist."  Something the development guys insist on that is very
> sane.  Note this doesn't have to mean "File the bug or I'll ignore you";
> it could mean "If you don't/can't file the bug, I will get it in there
> for you to tracak the work."  At least, it should when you're the
> kindler, gentler subproject. :-)

But bugzilla is universally understood to be neither kinder nor
gentler. :)

I'm not sure what the bottom line is here ... is it better to have one
tool, albeit one with a high barrier to entry?  Or should we accept an
easier to use tool, therefore attracting more usage, but increasing our
workload across the two tools?

If I had to file a bug for every error I found, I'd go nuts.  I'd much
rather fill out a quick ticket or, better yet, email docs-bugs at fp.o and
have a ticket automagically created.

I don't care if it uses BZ or OTRS on the backend. :)

- Karsten
   Karsten Wade, 108 Editor       ^     Fedora Documentation Project 
 Sr. Developer Relations Mgr.     |  fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject
   quaid.108.redhat.com           |          gpg key: AD0E0C41
////////////////////////////////// \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
-------------- 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-docs-list/attachments/20070616/c4f60b6c/attachment.sig>

More information about the fedora-docs-list mailing list