[CentOS-devel] [scl.org] Fwd: Re: bug reporting for slcs ?

Karsten Wade kwade at redhat.com
Wed Nov 11 21:16:08 UTC 2015


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 11/11/2015 09:01 AM, Honza Horak wrote:
> On 11/11/2015 11:00 AM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
>> On 11/11/15 08:55, Honza Horak wrote:
>>> I see, but on the other hand it gives us ability to clone bugs
>>> to RHSCL product since many issues in centos collections will
>>> be reproducible in RHSCL packages as well.
>>> 
>>> With other packages that are rebuilt in centos (non-SCL),
>>> people report issues into bugzilla.redhat.com as well, don't
>>> they?
>>> 
>> 
>> no, built in centos -> bugs.centos.org; SIG content or
>> otherwise.
> 
> why is this better than pointing people to 
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=softwarecollections.
org?

As
> 
this has come up a few times, we might want to add it to the
project FAQ? This is the list of reasons I've gathered in the last
year on why the CentOS Project needs its own bug reporting tool.

1. Consistency -- you always know where to file bugs around /anything/
related to the CentOS Project, rather than having to go find out which
parts use a different bug tracker.

2. Visibility -- CentOS Project contributors are not all Fedora or Red
Hat bug users, nor should they have to be to participate in the
project. Using N bug reporting tools rather than one location means
some parts of the project are dark to participants.

3. All open -- bugs at bugzilla.redhat.com have the annoying habit of
being hidden for non- at redhat.com accounts, whether the entire bug or a
comment. Even if there is a rule to never-make-private, it's hard to
enforce -- you don't know to request that a bug or comment made be
open as per the rule if you don't know it exists because it's private
and hidden.

4. Process -- CentOS is not RHEL (for example), bugs don't belong in
the upstream bugzilla.redhat.com until they are verified as
reproducible in that environment. A bug filed against an SCL running
on CentOS cannot be filed properly in bugzilla.r.c since the rest of
the stack it rides on (CentOS Linux + potentially other SIG content)
is not in bugzilla.r.c nor in Red Hat's purview to fix.

5. Optics -- CentOS bugs are not Red Hat bugs, it's confusing to
people if some bug reports are filed in Bugzilla, some in Mantis, etc.

Your point that centralized management makes life easier for package
maintainers and bug product owners is important, but has generally
been rejected because it puts the burden on the bug reporter to know
when and where to file which type of bug. That is a higher barrier to
bug reporting, lowering reporting rates, and increasing dis-engagement
with the project.

Regarding the discussion of merging bug reporting, etc., a few points
come to mind.

* Massive undertaking with small perceptual value.
* Large number of resources needed to merge.
* Current project contributors are focused on areas they care more
about and/or perceive as more important/higher value.
* Therefore, any merge effort is going to need a technical leader who
cares and can commit time, and can pull in the other contributors to
make it happen. This is in addition to reaching a consensus with the
community.

Regards,
- - Karsten
- -- 
Karsten 'quaid' Wade        .^\          CentOS Doer of Stuff
http://TheOpenSourceWay.org    \  http://community.redhat.com
@quaid (identi.ca/twitter/IRC)  \v'             gpg: AD0E0C41
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAlZDsBcACgkQ2ZIOBq0ODEE/aQCfR2OBV4VECy9cr5HQMkL/ITKD
qC8AoMBNj6rGelL6vdQt7d/cuyhYPTfM
=RA74
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


More information about the CentOS-devel mailing list