On 01/12/2012 03:11 PM, Musayev, Ilya wrote: > RedHat, why marking bugs as private - and denying access to 99.5% of its > user base. On several occasions, BZ that I’ve opened became private – I > never asked for it.
These are usually bugs with private client data in it. Red Hat has a duty to protect the privacy of those clients, so it's a reasonable default position to make those bugs private. > In order for me to get the content of marked private BZ, i have to open > a support case with RH and waste my time and support time on something > as stupid as this. It's not really stupid when you consider privacy. > Maybe its easier to make a note on BugZilla and just say "PLEASE DONT > POST PRIVATE/CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION – THIS IS A PUBLICLY VIEWED > RESOURCE"? or ask a bug reporter to make this bug private from the get go? > > *If you really want to make a bug private – open a redhat support case > and not public BZ.* > > If you happen to agree with what is mentioned here, please voice your > opinion – maybe someone from RedHat reads it and miracle happens. > > PS: Most of BZ referenced in release notes are marked private with a > faint description of what could have been fixed – however since > description is very brief, it makes me request BZ details over and over > again. As a user, I admit it can be frustrating to follow a link to a closed bug. However, I understand their position. When they identify a problem, they generally create a public page explaining the fault, it's fix and what versions of RPMs the problem was resolved in. Personally, I think this is reasonable. -- Digimer E-Mail: digi...@alteeve.com Freenode handle: digimer Papers and Projects: http://alteeve.com Node Assassin: http://nodeassassin.org "omg my singularity battery is dead again. stupid hawking radiation." - epitron _______________________________________________ rhelv6-list mailing list rhelv6-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhelv6-list
