Re: The bugzilla story

[Martin J. Bligh]

> As some of you may have noticed I've been doing a run on bugzilla for
> the last few days to close old bugs and upgrade those who still are real
> bugs.
> 
> I have a few things that I would like to enforce on bugzilla to makes it
> more maintanable which it clearly hasn't been for a while - there are
> lots and lots of bugs open older than 2.6.0-final.
> 
> I think the alternative trees section should be dropped. This is
> especially a matter for -mm which has most reports of the alternative
> trees in bugzilla. -mm changes way too rapidly to keep track of at
> bugzilla ending up with open bugs that are fixed long ago.
> 
> I also think this goes for any alternative tree, that problems should be
> reported directly to the maintainer/LKML of the tree. Only if a problem
> can be reproduced with the mainline kernel should the bug be reported at
> bugzilla. 
> 
> New bugzilla reports against other trees than mainline should be
> rejected and ask the submitter to report directly to the
> maintainer/LKML.
> 
> Andrew, what do you think about bug reports against -mm on bugzilla?
> 
> Does anyone see a problem with this? 

The subtrees section was created for exactly that reason - to isolate the
bugs in alternate trees, and keep the out of everyone else's hair. Now if
one was to argue that bugs in -mm should be cleaned up much more agressively,
that'd make a lot of sense ... but that should be fairly easy to do as 
they're in a separate category you can search by.

The main issue is that there haven't been many people doing what you're doing
now ... going through and housekeeping the bugs.

M.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/