Quoting Bjorn Tillenius <bjorn@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
There are two ways forward here: either the Amarok team go through the process of being Ubuntu QA and are given the required privileges, or they manage their own Amarok tasks in bugs. There are ways of improving both these approaches: - We could offer a per-package official bug contact, which would still be official Ubuntu QA, but only for a specific package.I was going to suggest something like this. Tom is currently working on 'structual subscriptions', which will allow you to subscribe to different objects, for example projects and packages. When that is done, we can convert the existing package bug contacts to subscriptions, and then we can use package bug contacts to give permission for working on bugs for a specific package. That way there's no real difference between being a bug contact for a distro, project, or package, it's only the scope that's different, so i think it's a better model than what we have today.
To me, the most logical, easy (for upstream) and integrated way to deal with this is quite obvious: have Launchpad talk to the Bugzilla at bugs.kde.org (which Amarok is using). As Bugzilla is already able to talk to other bugzillas, ideally this feature in Launchpad would be achieved by: 1) Making the Launchpad bugtracker a distributed bugtracker able to talk with other installations of Launchpad (for example, with dogfood.launchpad.net) 2) Implementing a façade to the Bugzilla interface, so that bugs.kde.org believes bugs.launchpad.net is another Bugzilla.
-- Pau Garcia i Quiles http://www.elpauer.org (Due to my workload, I may need 10 days to answer)
This is the launchpad-users mailing list archive — see also the general help for Launchpad.net mailing lists.
(Formatted by MHonArc.)