On Thu, 28 Aug 2008, Richard Lowe wrote: > Derek Cicero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> Richard Lowe wrote: >>> Derek Cicero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>> >>>> Richard Lowe wrote: >>>>> Richard Lowe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>>>> >>>>>> Since at least the upgrade this morning, b.o.o is pointing people >>>>>> toward [EMAIL PROTECTED] in the bug report form. >>>>>> >>>>>> While I'm sure there was some good reason for that, at some point, I'd >>>>>> venture to suggest that whatever that reason is is no longer "good". >>>>> Also, the text directing people toward defect.opensolaris.org would >>>>> really benefit from being accurate. And directing people there when >>>>> it is actually appropriate, not in general. >>>> Which text, specifically, are you referring to? >>>> >>> >>> """ >>> Please Note: If you wish to view or file bugs against any OpenSolaris >>> distribution, please use defect.opensolaris.org. >>> """ >>> >>> Which is not completely the case, bugs against software *unique* to >>> Indiana, and bugs against in-development software should be there, >>> bugs against most things still live in bugster, as best as I'm aware. >>> >>> I think it should be clarified such as to cause as little confusion as >>> possible. >> >> I am more than happy to change the text, but I'm not sure your >> description actually makes it clearer. > > Right, that wasn't suggested text. :)
Hi Derek & Rich, sorry for joining the conversation late - I just subscribed to this alias. What is the motivation for having that text there at all? I'm curious, because the majority of our bugs are still being tracked in Bugster, so b.o.o. is the right place for most things except: projects that have yet note integrated into the the main source base (which covers Indiana specific type things). Those projects should all have pages for their users telling them where to file bugs (which is still not d.o.o. in all cases) I keep hearing about bugs being inadvertantly filed in d.o.o - I was really hoping to see a message on d.o.o. added pointing people to b.o.o. instead :) We've had issues already with security related issues ending up on d.o.o., where the proper people aren't watching those bugs (because they don't have projects there). That's clearly "not good". >> Would it better to say if you running SXCE/DE post bugs in b.o.o., if >> you running OpenSolaris 200X.XX go to defect? >> >> I thought that was the overall objective. > > It seems likely to be, but I'm still not convinced it's the right > thing. > > This whole situation is a complete mess, assuming people on the > Indiana side are moving bugs that should be in bugster, to bugster, I > guess that's the best that can be done. Is someone specifically tasked with this? > But either suggestion at present is going to cause people running > Indiana to file their bugs in d.o.o, even if generally applicable, > which is just wrong. I guess it's less wrong if the Indiana folk are > going to use that to triage them to make sure it's not an indiana-ism > that's breaking stuff, but it's still unpleasant. > > Being more specific about "OpenSolaris" would help, I'm just not sure > it'd help that much. Something like, "If you are filing an issue against a project that is still a work in progress, you'll want to look for the relevant project in d.o.o." (yes, I know that can be confusing,too, as Nevada as a whole is still a "work in progress", but it's not being handled as a small project... :-) I think saying "OpenSolaris" is misleading, because much of what is in OpenSolaris really shouldn't have their bugs tracked in d.o.o. Thoughts? Valerie -- Valerie Fenwick, http://blogs.sun.com/bubbva Solaris Security Technologies, Developer, Sun Microsystems, Inc. 17 Network Circle, Menlo Park, CA, 94025. _______________________________________________ website-discuss mailing list [email protected]
