Incomplete with no response >30 days

HggdH hggdh2 at gmail.com
Sun May 25 16:02:37 BST 2008


On Sun, 2008-05-25 at 18:33 +1000, Sarah Hobbs wrote:

> Whoever said that the bug triagers could not contribute to 
> -devel-discuss?  For that matter, whoever said that they do not do so 
> already?

You got me. I do not know who said that. I know, though, that I am
trying to keep triagers in the discussion.

> There seems to be an attitude of "screw the developers, we are the 
> mighty bug squad, and can do what we like" here.
> 

Sarah, please do not put in my mouth what I did *not* say. I do not know
what other problems you have been having, but I am sure I *never* said
such a stupidity.

Let me re-state what I said: 

"I am not quite sure I understand. So the proposal will be discussed by
developers without input from triagers?"

> But really, isn't the job of the bug squad to get bugs into a good state 
> of triage, so they can be dealt with by the developers?

Indeed. This is what we all want.

>   Does it not 
> make sense, therefore, to listen to what the developers want the bug 
> squad to do to the bugs, in a general sense, and then for the bug squad 
> to go away and deal with the specifics?

No. It does not. It does make sense for *BOTH* developers and
bug-squadders to discuss and reach a consensus. We do not impose on YOU
how to develop, you should not impose on us how to triage.

But we can reach a consensus. 

And the triagers will not go away, no matter how much you would like
them to.


> I don't think the bug squad should have the right to say "we will make 
> the rules, everyone else must follow them", as, while there are many bug 
> squad people (yes, developers are still bug squad too), the bug squad 
> does not put real bugs (ie, not invalid, etc) in a final state, so 
> someone always has to come after them, and touch the bugs afterwards. 
> This is not the case for developers.

Again, I never said that -- YOU say it. What I said is I see no sense on
having a discussion on how to triage done exclusively in the
devel-discuss, and then presenting the triagers on what has been
decided. There is a mailing list devoted to triaging. I see no problem
in having the discussion in devel-discuss *and* on bugsquad (even if
this means duplication): all affected areas will be able to immediately
participate. But I still fail to understand why the discussion would be
restricted to devel-discuss, a forum for developers, not for triagers.

> 
> For those who are interested in getting the bugs into a final, finished 
> state, in the bug squad, you may want to look at becoming developers 
> yourselves.

OK. So now I find that it is not the "mighty" triagers, but the "mighty
developers"?

> Just my AUD $0.02, from another fellow member of the bug squad and developer

Ditto here, from someone who has done both development and
triaging/support for some quite long years. I am not as ignorant as you
may think.

It is a pity that this discussion escalated so fast to the makings of a
flame war.

..hggdh..

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-bugsquad/attachments/20080525/c177ea0c/attachment.pgp 


More information about the Ubuntu-bugsquad mailing list