Dave Jones wrote:
On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 06:55:08AM +0800, John Summerfied wrote:
> Les Mikesell wrote:
> >On Tue, 2006-01-17 at 15:34, John Summerfied wrote:
> >
> >>The current policy of retiring an FC release immediately _before_ the
> >>release of the second subsequent release seems completely bizarre to me.
> >
> >It is really in no one's best interest to have developers wasting
> >their time backporting fixes and updates into an old distribution.
>
> If Rahul is right there aren't any, so the workload won't be great. If
> he's wrong (as I expect) there won't be many, and still thr workload's
> not great.
Even if you're not pushing out updates, the fact that it's still supported means
you still need to do bugzilla triage, which takes lots of time.
Reading bugzillamail takes up the bulk of my time, as opposed to actually
writing/fixing any code.
Dave
One behavior of Bugzilla that makes bug tracking hard is that bugzilla
entries no longer appear on the filer's homepage and are easily lost
until the expiring release bug reports were closed or questioned for
feedback.
I forgot all about the Synaptic related bug until questioned and it did
not appear as a category on the filer homepage.
Another category related to these types of reports might give developers
a less cluttered with "lost and found" bug reports.
The issue that I reported was long ago resolved. I had no idea it was
still open. If the report showed on the page, I would have closed the
report as resoved.
Jim
--
We are using Linux daily to UP our productivity -- so UP yours, Microsoft!
