ubuntu-bugcontrol team mailing list archive

[Leann Ogasawara <leann.ogasawara@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, 2008-05-02 at 09:48 -0700, Brian Murray wrote:
> ----- Forwarded message from ffm@xxxxxxxxxxx -----
[snip]
> > 5) I also need to see a list of five or more bugs which you have
> triaged.  These bugs should demonstrate your understanding of the triage
> process and how to properly handle bugs.  If there is a bug in your list
> that does not have an importance indicate what importance you would give
> it after becoming a member of Ubuntu Bug Control.  Please use urls in
> your list of bugs so I can more easily find them.
> https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kio-umountwrapper/+bug/222791
> - no priority until the user responds

It was good that fixed the title of the report and referred the reporter
to the code of conduct.  He may have wanted to add in his comment that
he fixed the offensive title for the reporter.  The odd thing is that
after he fixed the title (to "package kio-umountwrapper 0.2-0ubuntu6
failed to install/upgrade"), ffm also asked the reporter for the steps
to reproduce the bug, the expected behavior, and the actual behavior.  I
think the answers to his questions are pretty clear from the title he
added.  He probably doesn't need the reporter to reiterate it.  I think
it would have been better if he had posted a comment that he tried to
reproduce the issue to at least confirm or deny the bug.

> https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/openoffice.org/+bug/222498
> - none as of yet, but if it is reproducible and not something esoteric, it
> would have a "high" priority

This bug's title could have definitely used some improvement.  Also, it
would have been good if he inquired about which version of OpenOffice
was being used and then try to recreate the issue.  Just stock replying
asking for the steps to reproduce, expected behavior and actual behavior
isn't very helpful when the reporter has already given enough
information to answer these questions.  

> https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-vfs/+bug/223922 - low

Even though this was deemed as not a bug, it was good he tried creating
the debdiff.

> https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubuntu-docs/+bug/223871 -
> high, if it is reproducible, it is a core package.

It was good he tried to reproduce the issue here.  However, when he
commented "I do not get that error when installing on a stock Ubuntu
system." I think it would have been more informative to outline the
steps he used to try and reproduce the issue and also provide version
information regarding the packages he had installed.

> https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/curl/+bug/223855 - wishlist

It was nice he attempted opening the upstream bug report.  However, it
was immediately closed because the wishlist request was already
supported in libcurl 7.18.1 .  It probably would have been better if ffm
did a little more research to find this out before bothering the
upstream devs with an already fixed request.

Unfortunately I think ffm needs a little more time to try and improve on
his triaging.  Nack from me, sorry.

Thanks,
Leann