Drunk on power: FC1 and before.... [was: A Heads-Up: moving all FC3 bugs to "needinfo"]
mattdm at mattdm.org
Tue Jul 11 17:49:09 UTC 2006
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/>
More information about the Fedora-maintainers