Picking up from where Mageia forked off, many things activities look
like continuity from Mandriva Linux. But forking is also a challenge to
find not too hard to implement improvements - such as "bugzilla monitoring".
I think I am not the only one who frequently felt frustrated submitting
yet another bug, knowing that it had more 50% of chance to disappear the
"oubliettes". I think there is an objective question: if bugs are not
followed up, that should not just happen by accident - there should be
an explicit and justified decision. There is also a subjective question:
a user who went through the pains to write a good bug report should get
a feedback with a followup, even if there are no "comments" in the
bugzilla data base.
Some ideas: have a "lost bug advocate"? create a team - just like the
"triage team" that feels responsible for bugs not to disappear?
(different from the, but talking to, maybe overlapping the triage team,
leaning on the "dev" - in Mageia it will be a volonteer, even more
important - to whom a bug is assigned) - proposing and justifying which
bugs - for the time being - will have no follow up), creating some
commented statistics on the fate of bugs - good for QA, but also for PR
about Mageia? trigger an alarm if too many bugs remain un-resolved? -
always assuming that enough active contribution can be recruited from
the temp. wiki list. I also believe that, for Mageia, the situation is
different. In Mandriva, I guess that some (many?) of these acitivities
were done by staff of the QA group - in Mageia an alternative is needed.
Maybe Mandriva had something like this - if yes, it was too well hidden.
_______________________________________________
Mageia-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.mageia.org/mailman/listinfo/mageia-discuss
