On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 02:03:17PM +0200, Andreas Olsson wrote: > I would like to apply for a membership in the Ubuntu bug control team. > > > 1) Do you promise to be polite to bug reporters even if they are rude to > > you or Ubuntu? Have you signed the Ubuntu Code of Conduct? > Yes, I promise to be polite to bug reporters. I have signed the CoC. > > > 2) Have you read Bugs/HowToTriage, Bugs/Assignment, Bugs/Status and > > Bugs/Importance? Do you have any questions about that documentation? > Yes, I have read those texts. I don't have any questions on them currently, > but if I do, I believe I know where to ask. > > > 3) What sensitive data should you look for in a private Apport crash report > > bug before making it public? > Banking information, passwords, encryption keys, etc. I believe I'd also be > vary about phone number and possibly e-mail addresses. > > > 4) Is there a particular package or group of packages that you are > > interested in helping out with? > I primarily triage bug related to the server team. > > > 5) Please list of five or more bugs which you have triaged... > > *) https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/296952 > I would have set the importance of this bug to Medium.
This looks great to me, thanks for tracking down the bug and providing a fix. This seems like it would be relatively easy to create a package for a SRU - do you think it would be worthwhile for Hardy? > *) https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/325393 > I would set the importance of this bug to Low. > (Yes, now I do know how to register a new project in Launchpad.) Forwarding bug reports upstream is a great service, thanks for doing this! I agree with the importance you've chosen too. The bug was missing a Debian bug watch which I added after finding the right Debian bug. It might be worth watching this, since it was fixed upstream recently, to ensure that it gets pulled in for Karmic. > *) https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/330588 > I would set the importance of this bug to Low, or possibly to Wishlist. > Actually I would probably ask for a second opinion in #ubuntu-bugs. Thanks for taking the time to communicate with the reporter and find out what exactly there concern/bug was. Its a rather interesting question but I'm not certain this belongs filed about netkit-tftp. The best way of resolving the issue might be having the package description for tftp-hpa and tftp updated to be more clear. If it were to happen it should happen upstream with Debian. > *) https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/349072 > I would actually have given this bug the Medium importance. While it might be > a corner case I do believe it's a very legitimate case in a backup program. Again this is great work, thanks for preparing the patch and getting the bug fix in Jaunty! It looks like you might have typo'ed the changelog entry to get the bug report auto-closed. It needs to be LP: #349072 - you seem to be missing the ":". I also agree with an importance of Medium for this bug report. > *) https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/362511 > I would set the importance of this bug to Low. As mentioned by others you've done a great job with this bug report and communicating with the reporter. Low does seem appropriate for this bug report. Based on the quality of your work and the positive feedback from other Bug Control members I'm happy to approve your membership in the team. Welcome! -- Brian Murray @ubuntu.com
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-bugcontrol Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-bugcontrol More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
