lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Nov]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: kernel bugzilla is FPOS (was: Re: "buggy cmd640" message
Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:

(...)

>> * After each major kernel release bugzilla should send a kind request for
>> retesting to all open bugs.
>
> Good idea, IMO.

Another alternative would be to send such a request if a given bug had
no activity for, say, 6 months.

(...)

>> * Last but not least our bugzilla just looks ugly (it is _very_ important,
>> I feel disgusted each time I have to work with it, OTOH I love using
>> gitweb - you get the idea).
>
> Well, that doesn't matter to me as long as it's useful. Any ideas how to
> improve that? ;-)

Upgrade to Bugzilla 3.0.x. Its interface looks a bit better (and has a
handful of useful features).

(...)

>> Hmm, what about switching to some proprietary bug tracking system just to
>> talk Linus into writing a superior one? ;-)
>
> I think that we just have to get an idea of what exactly is needed. IOW, we
> need to know exactly how we're going to handle bugs as much as we needed
> to know exactly how we were going the handle the flow of changes.
> Perhaps it would be necessary to use a proprietary bug tracking system for some
> time for this purpose, but _maybe_ we can figure it out without anything like
> that.

How do others track bugs for software projects? RedHat, Novell, IBM,
others - anyone reading this thread?


--
Tomasz Chmielewski
http://wpkg.org

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-11-25 15:05    [W:0.045 / U:0.444 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site