Interesting comments

[John Summerfield]

TK009 wrote:
> Adam Williamson wrote:
>> I should add that I'm talking in terms of practicality here, and taking
>> into consideration that we have not many active triagers trying to
>> triage a very large amount of bugs. In that situation, it's sometimes
>> better to triage 100 bugs without reproduction at an accuracy rate of
>> 85% than it is to triage 15 bugs with reproduction at an accuracy rate
>> of 95%. IMHO, anyway.
> That is it in a nutshell. Less than 20 active triagers (according to the 
> list http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/ActiveTriagers), 6000+ 
> bugs in NEW state. I never discourage others from reproducing, if they 
> can, it's a bonus. Requiring that a triager try and reproduce every bug, 
> is asking to much of mostly (all?) volunteers.
> 
> TK009
> 
I'm only guessing at what RH _might_ do, basing those guesses on what I 
know. One fact for example, is that RH draws from Fedora to create its 
RHEL releases, so there appears to be some self-interest in ensuring 
software likely to be in RHEL works on computers RHEL is likely to be 
run on.

What RH _should_ do has to be tempered by its cost, and I have no means 
of guessing there.



-- 

Cheers
John

-- spambait
1aaaaaaa at coco.merseine.nu  Z1aaaaaaa at coco.merseine.nu
-- Advice
http://webfoot.com/advice/email.top.php
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555375

You cannot reply off-list:-)