[Mageia-dev] Proposal for bugzilla

Thu Dec 23 20:51:21 CET 2010

On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 12:43:23AM +0100, Samuel Verschelde wrote:
+> Le mercredi 22 décembre 2010 20:34:18, Ahmad Samir a écrit :
+> > 
+> > On 22 December 2010 21:25, Frederic Janssens <fjanss at gmail.com> wrote:
+> > > On 2010-12-22, Ahmad Samir <ahmadsamir3891 at gmail.com> wrote:
+> > >> On 22 December 2010 18:37, Frederic Janssens <fjanss at gmail.com> wrote:
+> > >>> On 2010-12-22, Ahmad Samir <ahmadsamir3891 at gmail.com> wrote:
+> > >>>> On 22 December 2010 01:32, Frederic Janssens <fjanss at gmail.com> wrote:
+> > >
+> > >>>>> First I think it would be usefull to have a multiline (Large Text Box)
+> > >>>>> 'RPM Packages' field, instead of a single line (Free Text) field as
+> > >>>>> used by mandriva.
+> > >>>>> A single bug can concern more than one rpm. One thing mageia-app-db
+> > >>>>> will do is search all bugs affecting an rpm. For that search to be
+> > >>>>> meaningfull all affected rpms should be mentioned.
+> > >>>>
+> > >>>> 'One bug per report' is what we should do (did); if a bug originates
+> > >>>> from more than one package, a separate report for each of them should
+> > >>>> be opened with the Block/Dependency set correctly.
+> > >>>
+> > >>> Sorry for not beeing clear.
+> > >>> What I propose is not for the case 'a bug originates from more than
+> > >>> one package';
+> > >>> but for the case 'a bug manifests itself in than one package'.
+> > >>
+> > >> A bug that manifests in more than one package must originate from
+> > >> 'some package', that 'some package' is the only one that should be in
+> > >> the 'RPM Package' field; i.e that's the package that's going to need
+> > >> fixing.
+> > >
+> > > Sorry again, what I mean, and should have written, is :
+> > > 'a bug manifests itself in one package, but in more than one -version-release'.
+> > >
+> > 
+> > There's no way in bugzilla to do this at the moment (there's talk
+> > about this being implemented in bugzilla-4.0, which I haven't tried
+> > before). Traditionally the Whiteboard field was used for such issues
+> > (or separate reports were opened for each affected stable release).
+> > Having a multi-line RPM Package wouldn't be the way to go with this
+> > (IMHO).
+> > 
+> 
+> In fact I think Frederic was talking about several versions of the same 
+> package, not necessarily several versions of the distribution. However, 
+> I don't think we can or should ask people to write down every package 
+> version which has the bug. 
+> 
+> We can guess many things automatically, provided the information is of 
+> good quality (the RPM/SRPM field always has a complete filename in it, 
+> and all affected versions of the distribution are flagged, whatever the 
+> way used for that : multivalue field when it'll be possible, whiteboard meanwhile...).
+> 
+> For those who don't wan't to read everything, example 1 may be enough, 
+> I'm just trying to cover several cases, not that every case brings 
+> something really important to the discussion. My point in those examples 
+> is that we can provide useful information regarding bugs on packages in 
+> software managers or mageia-app-db, but that depends on the information 
+> present in the bug reports, that's what I'd like this to be taken into 
+> account in bug handling processes. 
+
+What about using the changelog for signalling what bug
+have been closed ?
+
+Something like what is done by debian 
+http://www.debian.org/doc/developers-reference/pkgs.html#upload-bugfix
+
+-- 
+Michael Scherer
+