Reproducible w3m bug
ubuntu at kitterman.com
Fri May 15 14:47:36 UTC 2009
> Whenever I am drowned in "Is this still a problem?" emails (and
> bear in
> mind it takes ages to type up these reports in the suggested style
> precisely so
> OTHERS can reproduce the problem) it occurs to me that perhaps I've
> misunderstood the purpose of the Ubuntu bug tracker (it seems to most
> those people who spend the most time on bugs). The most vivid example was
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/rrootage/+bug/261189 (there was
> even a
> patch and an explanation).
This is a real problem. I see lots of bugmail from triagers asking if the
reporter still has the problem/can reproduce the problem in a later
release when it's clear the triager in question has not attempted to do so
I think you are not misunderstanding. I think it's the people doing this
kind of 'triaging' and thinking they are helping. We need more people who
can do proper triage work and I've really no idea how to get them.
WIth respect to that specific bug, it would help a lot if the relevant
sponsoring team were subscribed (ubuntu-main-sponsors or
ubuntu-universe-sponsors) - yes, this is something it would have been
helpful if a triager had noticed and done.
My "solution" was to get more involved in Ubuntu development to help make
sure my own itches get scratched. Not everyone can/will take this
approach of course.
I can certainly understand being discouraged. I appreciate the effort. I
can tell you as an Ubuntu developer when I get well crafted bugs I am very
glad to see them. Even if I can't fix it, I do make an effort to get them
I'd encourage you to find a way to get more involved in solving the
problem and not give in to your understandable discouragement. I think we
have a lot of energetic people who don't really understand what bug triage
is about, perhaps you could join in teaching them (clearly you get it).
More information about the Ubuntu-devel-discuss