An invalidated bug. Should it have really been invalidated?

[Phil Wyett]

On Mon, 2013-08-12 at 12:13 -0700, Brian Murray wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 06:13:09AM +0100, Phil Wyett wrote:
> > On Sat, 2013-08-10 at 14:23 -0400, Chris Johnston wrote:
> > > I'm not going to comment on keeping the bug opened or closed, however
> > > I will point out:
> > 
> > > "Many Linux package, hardware, and other non-user space bugs are
> > > hardware dependent on both the hardware itself, and what other
> > > hardware the problematic hardware is connected to. The rule of thumb
> > > is one report, per person, per hardware combination, per bug. For more
> > > on this please see here, and further below in this article. As well,
> > > please do not post comments to another person's report, claiming you
> > > have the same problem, because you have the same hardware, or same
> > > computer model. Instead, please file a separate report, and make
> > > comments there. This is because no one can verify if you would have
> > > the same problem or not, because your hardware can not be analyzed. "
> > 
> > > https://help.ubuntu.com/community/ReportingBugs#Bug_reporting_etiquette
> > > 
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > I have read the whole document now after not reading it for a few years.
> > It seems many changes and caveats have been introduced and now we have
> > many flaws in the whole bug reporting process. What should be a simple
> > process for new/inexperienced users (not me as a dev), has actually
> > turned into a spiders web of iffy software and processes to perform the
> > overall task with the addition of many 'do nots' introduced by
> > contributors.
> > 
> > Is there anyway the bug squad can hold a review in conjunction with the
> > quality people and look at the whole process once more? As one example
> > to why. If the whole notion of one bug per person per hardware combo and
> > no posting to others reports is the way to go. We should really be using
> > the duplication method on launchpad and the " This bug affects 'x'
> > people. Does this bug affect you? Edit" with this affecting bug heat is
> > essentially redundant.
> 
> Could you elaborate on what you mean by the last two sentences here?
> 
> Keep in mind there is a distinction between packages which are generally
> hardware specific (the kernel, X packages) and those that are generally
> not like update-manager and Ubuntu Software Center.
> 
> --
> Brian Murray
> Ubuntu Bug Master
> 

I am looking at the flow of launchpad for bugs at the moment. I will
hopefully be able to better explain and offer opinion soon.

Regards

Phil
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-bugsquad/attachments/20130819/1f75bbe5/attachment.pgp>