Drunk on power: FC1 and before.... [was: A Heads-Up: moving all FC3 bugs to "needinfo"]

[Matthew Miller]

On Tue, Jul 11, 2006 at 10:54:39PM +0530, Rahul wrote:
> Good to know that you got helpful responses. Were the ones that got a 
> angry response critical ones?

Actually only one is overtly angry. The other is merely simmering. The angry
one is bug #144592, and the report is about odd behavior in nautilus. Not a
solid bug report, but it would have been good for it to have gotten a quick
triage reply. The second (bug #141587) is about a coding error in
evolution-data-server, which probably also should have gotten the quick
reply "good catch; this should be fixed upstream".


[re: rhl9 and before]
> I would say close them all and let people reopen it if any of it still 
> applies to a currently maintained version of Fedora and/REHL . RHEL bugs 
> are better deal with through the formal support channels though.

I think I'd do the NEEDINFO thing and maybe close in 60 days. Although maybe
it'd be nice if someone @redhat.com did the actual closing?

Do you have any particular wording I should use about the formal support
channels for RHEL?

-- 
Matthew Miller           mattdm at mattdm.org          <http://mattdm.org/>
Boston University Linux      ------>              <http://linux.bu.edu/>