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

Re: What to do with bug reports against non-existing/removed packages

On Mi, 13 iun 12, 07:44:46, Gergely Nagy wrote:
> Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> writes:
> > [private as I don't think it's relevant for -devel]

Moving to debian-qa (with Gergely's permission) and also CC'ing other 
people that showed interest. Sorry if you receive this twice, I don't 
know if you are subscribed to -qa or receiving mails via 

> > On Vi, 18 mai 12, 12:33:23, Gergely Nagy wrote:
> >> 
> >> There are probably a few other corner cases, but as you can see, it's
> >> not simple. That's why the list is so long still. On and off, a few
> >> people (myself included) try to shorten a bit, and so far, it seems we
> >> can handle the newly misfiled bugs.
> >  
> > While going through the list I've noticed #669628 and #660993 which are 
> > quite recent cases of package name typos that slipped through. If you 
> > need additional help with new bugs I would be willing to try.
> Whops! Not sure how they slipped through, good catch, thank you! As for
> help: it would be appreciated, but I think I can still catch most of the
> new ones, and going through the backlog would be much more useful (also
> a lot more work, and far more boring, indeed :().

Well, "given enough eyeballs all bugs are shallow" :) my offer still 
> An additional problem with having multiple people watch new bugs, is
> that it's not easy to coordinate. Altough... if we were both on IRC, we
> could announce on #debian-qa when we're looking for new misfiled bugs,
> and/or paste a list of reassigned bugs to the channel, so we don't
> duplicate work.

IMHO this is (or not) an issue whether we talk about the backlog or the 
new bugs. After the discussions on -devel I've started looking at the 
bug list and yesterday I tried to take care of a few classes where I was 
quite certain about a course of action.

It turns out that at least for the links-ssl bugs Manuel (in CC) has 
done some work as well (but in at least one case my new prod helped and 
the maintainer took care of a lot of them, phew), so IMHO:

New bugs
Looking at the bugs filed against 'general' I didn't see too many 
conflicts. Since all actions are reversible (even closing), I think 
having more people deal with them can only help in case someone is 
inactive or VAC or whatever.

Old bugs
As my experience shows these do need some coordination, otherwise we 
risk pissing of maintainers with repeated un-coordinated prods. One tool 
could be a wiki page by classes/sub-classes of bugs, with recommended 
action, who is dealing with them, etc.

> >> Any help with getting the backlog down to a much smaller number would be
> >> greatly appreciated. Updating the wiki[1] with guidelines and HOWTOs on
> >> how to handle specific cases would also be desirable, and I'm happy to
> >> help with either.
> >> 
> >>  [1]: http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/unknown-package/TODO
> >
> > It is unclear to me from that page who is 'we'. Subscribers of 
> > debian-qa, #debian-qa or some dedicated team handling these bugs? More 
> > important, whom do I contact (besides unknown-package@qa.d.o) for 
> > coordination?
> We, as in everyone interested. As for who to contact: debian-qa@. I do
> not know who unknown-package@ is sent to (it's not sent to
> me). Alternatively, which might be faster, #debian-qa on IRC.

Ok, I agree -qa (list and IRC) is a good place for discussion, but I 
still don't know who gets reports of new bugs and how do I get on the 
list/alias/etc. :p

BTW, if we consider Zack's "aliases considered harmful" theory, wouldn't 
it be better to simply direct these bugs to -qa@? What is 
unknown-package@qa.d.o actually used for?

Kind regards,
Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers:

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: