Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-project (95 mails)
| < Previous | Next > |
Re: [opensuse-project] Bug-filing granularity
- From: "Michel Salim" <michel.sylvan@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2007 13:53:14 -0400
- Message-id: <f224c6140708181053s2bb39bc1r78cc70a495ba3d68@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On 18/08/07, Dominique Leuenberger <Dominique.Leuenberger@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I think it's not that important to have the package name somewhere, much more important is the program name. A very good example IS gnome-games:
> rpm -ql gnome-games | grep "/bin" | wc
> 17 17 302
>
> so, we have actually 17 binaries in this package. A bug in a game (so one of the binaries) does not have to affect all the others. As well, the reporter might not be aware that the bug he just saw is coming from an underlying library, so in this case the component would be totally wrong per se.
>
> The granularity is, imho. quiet good. It happens some times that you just don't find the correct answer, but that's not a problem, as the screening-team is doing a great job reassigning, should somebody select a wrong one.
>
> Having now all the packages listed, would make it more than irritating for bugreporters; on my system, which is by far not fully bloated, I already habe 1347 packets. Would you suggest having an entry for every single one in bugzilla? I'm sure nobody would get it right anymore... that would be more than only confusin.
>
Fair enough; it's just that everyone else (Debian, Ubuntu,
Fedora/RHEL) allows filing bugs against individual packages. I guess
(assuming users know how to file bugs properly, or developers reassign
bugs to the correct packages) it makes it easier to evaluate the
performance of individual package maintainers. If SUSE developers are
not assigned individual packages to work on, but the maintenance is
done in teams, then the point is rather moot, and it is not so
important to have components be 1:1-mapped to SRPMs.
Regards,
--
Michel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> I think it's not that important to have the package name somewhere, much more important is the program name. A very good example IS gnome-games:
> rpm -ql gnome-games | grep "/bin" | wc
> 17 17 302
>
> so, we have actually 17 binaries in this package. A bug in a game (so one of the binaries) does not have to affect all the others. As well, the reporter might not be aware that the bug he just saw is coming from an underlying library, so in this case the component would be totally wrong per se.
>
> The granularity is, imho. quiet good. It happens some times that you just don't find the correct answer, but that's not a problem, as the screening-team is doing a great job reassigning, should somebody select a wrong one.
>
> Having now all the packages listed, would make it more than irritating for bugreporters; on my system, which is by far not fully bloated, I already habe 1347 packets. Would you suggest having an entry for every single one in bugzilla? I'm sure nobody would get it right anymore... that would be more than only confusin.
>
Fair enough; it's just that everyone else (Debian, Ubuntu,
Fedora/RHEL) allows filing bugs against individual packages. I guess
(assuming users know how to file bugs properly, or developers reassign
bugs to the correct packages) it makes it easier to evaluate the
performance of individual package maintainers. If SUSE developers are
not assigned individual packages to work on, but the maintenance is
done in teams, then the point is rather moot, and it is not so
important to have components be 1:1-mapped to SRPMs.
Regards,
--
Michel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx
| < Previous | Next > |