On 09/03/12 16:54, Benjamin Kerensa wrote: > Hello Everyone, > > My name is Benjamin Kerensa and I would like to submit a > re-application for Bug Control. > > > 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 and of course I have. > > Have you read Bugs/HowToTriage, Bugs/Assignment, Bugs/Status and > Bugs/Importance? Do you have any questions about that documentation? > I have read all and do not have questions at this time. > > What sensitive data should you look for in a private Apport crash > report bug before making it public? See Bugs/HowToTriage for more > information. > If coredump.gz exists look for Stacktrace.txt and > Threadstacktrace.txt and if you dont find passwords, things that > look like bank account numbers, CSS keys, user names, server > names, etc then you can mark it public although keeping it private > through its life does not hurt. > > Is there a particular package or group of packages that you are > interested in helping out with? > Will help where needed ;) > > Please list five or more bug reports which you have triaged and > include an explanation of your decisions. > > > [1] > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/oneiric/+source/boinc/+bug/878571 > Desc: BOINC was giving off Bad Url error message and was defective > in its current state in 64bit nut not 32bit > I verified the bug and also was the reporter. > > Importance: I would agree with the "Medium" designation since it > affected a wide range of users and had a severe impact > on a non-core application.
Agree on importance; although we do not usually want to see self-reported bugs, the process was correct. > > > [2] > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-control-center/+bug/844535 > > Desc: Essentially in the latest gnome-control-center they left out > the ability to switch between proxy profiles and there has been > other usability > issus related to this. I assisted by reporting this Known Bug to > upstream and updating our local bug. > > Importance: I would rank this on "Low" instead of "Wishlist" > because to some extent it causes problems but there is a known > workaround described on AskUbuntu. > Extra points for reporting this bug upstream :-). I agree with Low instead of Wishlist, even more due to a workaround being available., It would be really nice to have this workaround described in the bug, following [1]. > https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Bugs/Description > [3] > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/precise/+source/ubiquity/+bug/830946 > > > Desc: Essentially ubiquity has a embedded terminal window which > was not displaying the progress of the install and this had been > reported in other bugs (I acutally reported it once and bdmurray, > slangasek and I had discussed it at global jam) > > Importance: I would set this to "Medium" because it does affect a > large number of users although it does not cause a major defect > that would > inconvenience most users. > I am not sure I see what triaging effort you did there. But I agree with the Importance. > [4] > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubuntu-wallpapers/+bug/296538 > > > Desc: ubuntu-wallpapers has one wallpaper that uses jpg instead of > png > > Importance: This bug should be clearly kept at low since it really > affect the end user and is hard to notice as end-user. Agree with importance -- this is mostly cosmetic. But you did nothing here as a triager... > > [5] > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-control-center/+bug/844535 > > Desc: Essentially gnome-control-center no longer offers proxy > profiles and has caused some issue in switching > > Importance: This is a wishlist item for Ubuntu to restore a > feature available in 11.04 and was forward upstream and I feel > wishlist is definitely appropriate in this case since it is not a > Ubuntu Bug neccesarily. > This is the same bug as described in (2) above (and you are giving it a different importance). Notes: 1. Bug Control is the expert triage team. We are looking for people that are experienced triagers, and *know* triage in Ubuntu (the processes). Although I am personally grateful that you _also_ proposed fixes, a patch is not triaging... 2. the fact you gave two different importances to the same bug is not a problem (it can be argued both sides, in this case). It is a good example, though, on how importance is sometimes difficult to decide on. It would be a problem if there was a steep gradient between the two importances (like, say, from Low to High). Given the above, I am voting +0 on this application (due to note 1 above). I suggest you to resubmit your application with five bugs that really show your triager work. Cheers, ..C.. [1] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Bugs/Description
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP 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
