We will get fewer bug reports, those that we get will be of higher quality,
and we will be able to handle a greater
fraction than what we do today? ;-)
I understand those goals. I see the current process as sacrificing those
goals in favor of generating some good looking (but misleading)
statistics about the quality of the code that gets into Ubuntu. If
Ubuntu wants fewer bug reports that they don't have the manpower to take
a serious look at, they should communicate better about what kinds of
reports will get a serious look, and what won't, at a point in the
process before someone wastes their time generating a report that is
doomed to be ignored. And Ubuntu would generate less ill-will if they
had a bug status that says even if this is a real bug, we will never
have time to fix it in this release anyway and used it when appropriate
instead of stringing the user along asking for ever more information
that will never be used.
I'm not whining about not getting the support I'm not paying for. I'm
whining about being lied to.
--
[i945gm] x server crashes at random times (karmic)
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/509468
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu-X,
which is subscribed to xserver-xorg-video-intel in ubuntu.
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-x-swat
Post to : ubuntu-x-swat@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-x-swat
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
