Re: [qubes-devel] Changing the way we use milestones in the issue tracker
On 8/10/23 3:45 AM, jma...@tutanota.com wrote: > Aug 10, 2023, 07:18 by a...@qubes-os.org: > >> On 8/9/23 8:22 AM, jmake2 via qubes-devel wrote: >> >>> [...] >>> Well, I see Marek's point. I agree, that if the problem happens to be >>> upstream it should be closed with not-our-bug or something. And it happens >>> this way now quite often. >>> But note that Qubes OS users search for their issue and it's better they >>> find closed ticket than no ticket at all. And when people report, most of >>> them are not able to reliably check what happens in the original Fedora >>> that they do not have. That is why all major GNU/Linux distos still keep >>> issues in software that is made by third-party developers, it is a common >>> practice after all. >>> >> >> If you really want to open issues that you know are not Qubes bugs in the >> Qubes issue tracker for this reason, I suppose you can just make it clear >> when you open such issues that they should be closed as "not our bug," and >> I'll just immediately close them with that resolution. Seems a bit odd to >> me, but I suppose it's relatively harmless. >> >>> [...] >>> One the other hand, if the issue is related to f38 only, does it affect >>> R4.2? Currently it does, and it also does affect R4.1, but what will happen >>> when f39 comes out and f38 is EOL? How will it be removed from the >>> affects-4.2 group? Only manually for each of them. >>> >> >> In that scenario, we would simply close that F38-specific issue, since F38 >> has reached EOL. We wouldn't have to worry about removing the "affects-4.2" >> label, because the issue would be closed now anyway. (I think it's fine to >> have the "affects-4.2" label on a closed issue that once affected 4.2.) >> > Well, maybe I am wrong, maybe it is not a good idea to track third-party > issues that affect Qubes OS (even closed). I do not know. > > GNU/Linux distributions do it, but most of them are bigger, not a problem for > them to allow such issues. > We also allow them, but we close them as "not our bug" because that's what they are, and because they're not actionable for us. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "qubes-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to qubes-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/qubes-devel/1abbd6a1-7f1b-4364-2e31-f25f3737e0be%40qubes-os.org.
Re: [qubes-devel] Changing the way we use milestones in the issue tracker
Aug 10, 2023, 07:18 by a...@qubes-os.org: > On 8/9/23 8:22 AM, jmake2 via qubes-devel wrote: > >> [...] >> Well, I see Marek's point. I agree, that if the problem happens to be >> upstream it should be closed with not-our-bug or something. And it happens >> this way now quite often. >> But note that Qubes OS users search for their issue and it's better they >> find closed ticket than no ticket at all. And when people report, most of >> them are not able to reliably check what happens in the original Fedora that >> they do not have. That is why all major GNU/Linux distos still keep issues >> in software that is made by third-party developers, it is a common practice >> after all. >> > > If you really want to open issues that you know are not Qubes bugs in the > Qubes issue tracker for this reason, I suppose you can just make it clear > when you open such issues that they should be closed as "not our bug," and > I'll just immediately close them with that resolution. Seems a bit odd to me, > but I suppose it's relatively harmless. > >> [...] >> One the other hand, if the issue is related to f38 only, does it affect >> R4.2? Currently it does, and it also does affect R4.1, but what will happen >> when f39 comes out and f38 is EOL? How will it be removed from the >> affects-4.2 group? Only manually for each of them. >> > > In that scenario, we would simply close that F38-specific issue, since F38 > has reached EOL. We wouldn't have to worry about removing the "affects-4.2" > label, because the issue would be closed now anyway. (I think it's fine to > have the "affects-4.2" label on a closed issue that once affected 4.2.) > Well, maybe I am wrong, maybe it is not a good idea to track third-party issues that affect Qubes OS (even closed). I do not know. GNU/Linux distributions do it, but most of them are bigger, not a problem for them to allow such issues. -- Best regards, jamke -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "qubes-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to qubes-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/qubes-devel/NbU2DDy--3-9%40tutanota.com.
Re: [qubes-devel] Changing the way we use milestones in the issue tracker
On 8/9/23 8:22 AM, jmake2 via qubes-devel wrote: > [...] > Well, I see Marek's point. I agree, that if the problem happens to be > upstream it should be closed with not-our-bug or something. And it happens > this way now quite often. > But note that Qubes OS users search for their issue and it's better they find > closed ticket than no ticket at all. And when people report, most of them are > not able to reliably check what happens in the original Fedora that they do > not have. That is why all major GNU/Linux distos still keep issues in > software that is made by third-party developers, it is a common practice > after all. > If you really want to open issues that you know are not Qubes bugs in the Qubes issue tracker for this reason, I suppose you can just make it clear when you open such issues that they should be closed as "not our bug," and I'll just immediately close them with that resolution. Seems a bit odd to me, but I suppose it's relatively harmless. > [...] > One the other hand, if the issue is related to f38 only, does it affect R4.2? > Currently it does, and it also does affect R4.1, but what will happen when > f39 comes out and f38 is EOL? How will it be removed from the affects-4.2 > group? Only manually for each of them. > In that scenario, we would simply close that F38-specific issue, since F38 has reached EOL. We wouldn't have to worry about removing the "affects-4.2" label, because the issue would be closed now anyway. (I think it's fine to have the "affects-4.2" label on a closed issue that once affected 4.2.) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "qubes-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to qubes-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/qubes-devel/bdc42c65-17c2-da3a-280c-c99aa4891c29%40qubes-os.org.
