Johnny Hughes wrote:
We want people to submit Bugs to the mantis ... and we want to
community
to look through and answer the bug requests. CentOS is community
based.
We would also like a knowledgeable team of "Trusted Users" (thanks for volunteering to Steven Smoogen ... he is going to be one of these
users)
be able to provide answers, as well as have the knowledge to open upstream bugzilla entries when those are required. I do want to put links in the upstream bugzilla that point back to the centos entry, so that users searching in either can see both.
If you want to trust me, I'm volunteering as well :-) I'd suggest another mailing list, maybe bugteam@lists.centos.org - and have that address get assigned any new bugs (and all unassigned old ones) so interested people (ie, the "Trusted Users") can get a copy of all the bug reports. It seems bugs get automatically assigned to you at the moment?
We (the developers) will also (from time to time) create "issue trackers" in the bugs database to report positive and negative
feedback
for packages that we put into the testing repo.
That's good - I think you could say that is similar to a "Package Review" bug report in the RedHat bugzilla for a new Fedora Extras package. Not everything has to be a "bug".
... It is my feeling that items that are "Upstream required" actions
should
be listed both in bugs.centos.org and an upstream bugzilla ... and should not be "final actioned" until they are final actioned upstream. And maybe not even then ... as in the case of this bug:
http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=1637
That allows CentOS users to know about the bug if they search the
centos
bugs database, and it allows users of the upstream product see that CentOS is not just a "Sponge Project" that keeps taking and taking
while
giving nothing back. It is good for the upstream provider and their customers to know that CentOS is providing them a huge benefit by providing issues to support for correction (sometimes with suggested patches and solutions included).
How about adding a Category called "Upstream-RHEL4", and changing bugs from whatever the category is currently to "Upstream-RHEL4" once it has been reported upstream? Easier to keep track of upstream bugs that way I think, and you can run a report on how many bugs were reported by CentOS users.
Greg