On Nov 22, 13 14:43:20 +0100, Ruediger Meier wrote:
On Friday 22 November 2013, Stefan Behlert wrote:
Moin,
On Nov 21, 13 14:16:48 -0200, Claudio Freire wrote:
On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Stefan Behlert <behlert@suse.de> [...]
I think if the short description in the changelog is "obscure", it's not because of the bugnumber ;) Realistically, if the changelog is good, how many people check all the bugnumbers?
Packagers are doing it. If you read patch-xyz has been added because of bnc1234 then 1234 must be public.
Good point. But I am still thinking that a good changelog helps here more than a bugreport that may have information that is not even understandable (I have seen everything, from spanish to german to something that seemed to be english :) ).
(Note: In an enterprise world the number here is 100% or close to, but I have my doubts that in openSUSE this is identical. But I have no numbers, so feel free to correct me.)
So, what do you propose? What *can* SUSE employees do to improve that situation?
My suggestion is to NOT change the current behavior, but put more emphasis on good changelog texts.
You should log out from bugzilla for one week to get the feeling of us 2nd class packagers. It's not much fun with all these random non-sense bug numbers.
Oh, I know how this feeling is. I am also not allowed to see all bugs, as I am not part of the Security-team. As said, I inderstand your concern and wishes, I jsut do not think they are practical. But despite pushing internal to get people less restrict (some bugs really could be opened instead of hidden under the table), I see no solution, sorry. Stefan [...] -- Stefan Behlert, SUSE LINUX Project Manager Enterprise Server Maxfeldstr. 5, D-90409 Nuernberg, Germany Phone +49-911-74053-173 SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Nuernberg; GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendoerffer, HRB 16746 (AG Nuernberg) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org