On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 05:03:50PM +0200, Karl Eichwalder wrote:
"Dominique Leuenberger a.k.a DimStar"
writes: It might be worthy to discuss this and define a best-practice.
I think the only sane way is to clone the bug and set product info accordingly; I think their is a subtle difference using the "Copy to new" button (at the beginning of a bug) or "Clone this bug" link (at teh end).
Bugzilla automatically add Depends on/Blocks info (which you sometimes rather want to invert) and comments with the "old" bug number. Thus bugs are nicely chained together and the bug owner can easily work on them.
I still do not understand why some reporters, developers or project managers do not like this approach and insist on just "updating" the version info.
An argument might be to have only one bug ID reference in the package change log. And not multiple with diverging IDs. Here your chaining argument might apply. Do you have a nice example bug? Best would be one present in openSUSE and SUSE Linux Enterprise (SLE) and in multiple different versions. For example openSUSE 12.1, 12.2, Factory and SLE 11 SP 2. I prefer continious cross product package change log entries. The goal is to see only additions when moving to a newer release. Cheers, Lars -- Lars Müller [ˈlaː(r)z ˈmʏlɐ] Samba Team + SUSE Labs SUSE Linux, Maxfeldstraße 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany