bugs.centos.org (was RE: [CentOS-devel]Re: kernel-2.6.9-42.37.EL.c4testis available for i686 and x86_64 in the Testing Repo)

Fri Jan 5 23:14:02 UTC 2007
Karanbir Singh <mail-lists at karan.org>

Greg Swallow wrote:
>> its to report issues, however these testing kernels are a special
> No problem, I was agreeing with you about reporting bugs upstream for
> packages that are just rebuilds of upstream, including the testing
> kernels.  Maybe I should have made a new subject for the thread rather
> than half-hijacking the other one.

Actually, that is mostly true - but not completely. What we would really 
prefer is if issues were reported on bugs.centos.org and then a triaging 
team could manage and work with the developers on resolving / closing 
them properly.

The reason why the pref to not upstream bugzilla is that in cases there 
might be a local centos induced problem, and we would never know about 
those - it has happened. Also, upstream is completely oblivious about 
CentOS and the process we follow etc, I dont blame them for it. So the 
decision to take a report upstream should really be from the CentOS bug 
handing team, most users should try and report issues there.

Add to that there are packages in the CentOS infrastructure that dont 
come from upstream, we use a different package manager, we use a 
different mirror network and are a lot more dependent on the community 
for feedback and support - reporting issues to bugs.centos.org is really 
the right way to do things.

Now, I mentioned two things here - a Triaging and a bug handing team. 
Neither of which exist. Both both of which _should_. And members will 
need to come from the users community and the existing developers. So if 
people are interested, feel free to step forward. And now will be a good 

Btw, while I am still doing recruitment... I am still hoping that 
someone will step forward and offer to help with the Oracle's Linux 
offering -> CentOS migration guide...

- KB
Karanbir Singh : http://www.karan.org/ : 2522219 at icq