[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Defining Bugzilla states, Severity, and Priority on the wiki

On Wed, 2009-03-18 at 10:17 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-03-17 at 13:16 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> > On Tue, 2009-03-17 at 15:46 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > > 
> > > Right, exactly.  I think what would be ideal is to have a similar page
> > > defining the status values for Fedora usage, and then nag the bugzilla
> > > guys to make the Status help link point to one or the other depending on
> > > which product (RHEL/Fedora) you were looking at a bug for ...
> > 
> > Or we cam get over ourselves and figure out a way to use the same
> > definitions both within RHEL and within Fedora.
> Sure, that would work too. However, it does involve either convincing
> RHEL to change their process, or getting all Fedora maintainers to use
> the 'ERRATA', 'CURRENTRELEASE' and 'NEXTRELEASE' resolutions properly.
> I'm ready and willing to don my asbestos underpants and give that a
> shot, though, if we agree it's the best course. :)

Personally I don't see a better way around it, given the huge overlap of
Fedora and RHEL contributors.

Jesse Keating
Fedora -- FreedomĀ² is a feature!
identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]