Bugging questions

[Matthew Paul Thomas]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On May 2, 2006, at 12:03 PM, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
>
> On Sat, Apr 29, 2006 at 08:32:30PM +1200, Matthew Paul Thomas wrote:
> ...
>> 2.  A bug about Rosetta language charts being unusable in Ubuntu's
>>     emacs-w3m turns out to be a layout bug in w3m. Nobody is going
>>     to fix it specially for Ubuntu, and w3m upstream doesn't even
>>     *have* a bug tracker, but we can work around it in Rosetta.
>>     Rosetta status: Confirmed. w3m status: not recorded. Ubuntu w3m
>>     status: Not For Us.
>
> We should never refuse to forward bugs upstream just because upstream
> doesn't have a bug tracking system (or because Launchpad doesn't know 
> how to talk to it).

Right, this is another case for being able to enter an arbitrary URL to 
represent the remote bug report, regardless of whether Malone 
understands the bug tracker. In this case, it would be the URL to an 
archived mailing list message.

>> 3.  It's three weeks before the release of Edgy. A bug reported about
>>     the Ubuntu Installer was initially accepted for fixing in Edgy,
>>     but now it's too late, so it's deferred. Ubuntu ubuntu-installer
>>     status: Confirmed. Ubuntu Edgy ubuntu-installer status: Not For
>>     Us.
>
> I find the UI here to be confusing, and so do our users.  It seems
> unintuitive to have a list which includes both distributions and 
> releases; it's unclear what this should mean to the user.  What does 
> the status of the 'Ubuntu' task mean?  If it's the status in the 
> current development release, then it should say the name of the 
> release instead.  If it means something else, then what?

Printing the name of the latest release would be misleading because it 
would suggest that you have decided it should be fixed in that release 
specifically, when you haven't made any such decision.

Reopened <https://launchpad.net/products/malone/+bug/1720>, which is a 
simple idea to clarify this.

> ...
> "Disavowed" has a connotation that the bug is invalid; I expect it 
> would be confused with "Rejected".  I see no problem with "Not for 
> us", and I much prefer it to "Won't Fix Here".
> ...

Ok, great.

- -- 
Matthew Paul Thomas
http://mpt.net.nz/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFEVtZw6PUxNfU6ecoRAoGaAKCj1vJjtARRbLC+hWCS7Qs0BWH51QCgm2Dc
D10sCSy8K7lKcftJdHREi0A=
=lOwd
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----