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

Rahul sundaram at fedoraproject.org
Tue Jul 11 17:24:39 UTC 2006

Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 07, 2006 at 02:09:35PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
>> As I did with FC2 long ago, I'm going to go through and mark all open FC3
>> bugs as "needinfo". This is a last-ditch attempt to make sure any of those
>> that really need to be addressed by Fedora Legacy get the attention they
>> need, and that anything still open that's still an issue in current releases
>> doesn't get lost forever.
> So, this seems to be going pretty well. Of the 1100+ bugs, only two angry
> responses about how the bug should have been fixed long ago, and quite a lot
> of helpful action.

Good to know that you got helpful responses. Were the ones that got a 
angry response critical ones?

> So, I'm going to go and get the 148 FC1 bugs still open, which I never did.
> That should be pretty straightforward -- I'll add the note that Legacy isn't
> going to be doing FC1 for much longer either.
> *Then*, there's the question of _before_ that. There's 1051 bugs in open
> states attached to the "Red Hat Linux" and "Red Hat Linux Beta" products.
> Obviously a lot of that isn't going to be helpful or interesting after all
> these years -- and RHL9 is finally going out of Legacy support too. However,
> it's possible that there's some overlooked important/useful/still-relevant
> reports that would still apply to Fedora or RHEL.
> Does it seem worth it to stir this up?

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.


More information about the Fedora-maintainers mailing list