ubuntu-bugcontrol team mailing list archive

[Brian Murray <brian@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 10:13:48AM -0700, Brian Murray wrote:
> Forwarding application.
> 
> ----- Forwarded message from Dara Adib <daradib@xxxxxxxxx> -----
> 
> Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2008 17:07:02 -0400
> From: Dara Adib <daradib@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: Brian Murray <brian@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: daradib wants to join
> 
> > 1) Do you promise to be polite to bug reporters even if they are rude to
> > you or Ubuntu?  Have you signed the Ubuntu Code of Conduct?
> 
> I understood the importance of being polite and I have signed the Code
> of Conduct.
> 
> > 2) Have you read Bugs/HowToTriage[0], Bugs/Assignment[1] and
> > Bugs/Importance[2] at wiki.ubuntu.com?  Do you have any questions about
> > that documentation?
> 
> I have read the three wiki pages. However, I do have a
> comment/question with one of the points.
> 
> Under the section Special types of bugs, "Please merge <package> from
> Debian unstable (main)" is cited as being a project management task
> and the wiki page therefore states it should be avoided.
> 
> I will use Bug 252287 as an example here to better illustrate my
> problem. Bug 252287 is currently subscribed by Aïssi Dylan (reporter),
> Iain Lane, and me. With the exception of Iain Lane (who was subscribed
> to the bug later on), Aïssi Dylan and I are non-developers and members
> of Ubuntu Bug Squad. It seems highly unlikely, therefore, that this is
> a project management task for developers. I mistakenly subscribed
> Ubuntu Package Archive Administrators, as I believed that team would
> probably use the bug report as a project management task. Instead,
> Iain Lane commented that "Only developers with upload rights may
> approve sync requests and subscribe the archive" and promptly
> unsubscribed the archive administrators. I sent him a private email
> apologizing. After filling the bug report with as much information as
> I thought was necessary, I brought the issue up on #ubuntu-bugs to ask
> if it should be marked as triaged. I did not receive a fully
> conclusive answer. Some said the bug should be avoided since it was a
> project management task (which I find highly unlikely), while others
> said Triaged status is not the best step to take.
> 
> It is my opinion that the bug was filed by Aïssi Dylan as a request
> for the updated package, and not for project management purposes.
> Without Triaged status, though, it might take a while until a
> developer looks at the bug.
> 
> Thanks for your opinion on this matter.
> 
> > 3) What sensitive data should you look for in a private Apport crash
> > report bug before making it public?  See Bugs/HowToTriage[1] for more
> > information.
> 
> * sensitive numbers: bank accounts, credit cards, social security, etc.
> * passwords
> * keys: GPG/PGP, SSH, CSS DVD keys
> 
> > 4) Is there a particular package or group of packages that you are
> > interested in helping out with?
> 
> LyX and Wesnoth right now, though that may change in the future. I am
> currently subscribed to the bug mail for those two packages.
> 
> > 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.
> 
> Should I include bugs that I mark as a duplicate of another bug? Most
> of the bugs that I triage end up being duplicates. I will assume not,
> but please let me know. I will put six bugs here (they are not
> duplicates), just in case.

I think including one duplicate in an application to the Bug Control
team fine, however it should be just one as the process is the same for
every one.
 
> Bug 256345: https://bugs.launchpad.net/wesnoth/+bug/256345
> I will forward upstream as I could not find it reported in Wesnoth's
> bug tracker.Thanks to Greg Grossmeier for marking as status Low after
> request on #ubuntu-bugs.

This is great work, while you did not forward the bug upstream you did
mark it for forwarding and indicated to the reporter where to go to
forward the bug.  I also agree with the importance you had the bug
given.

As an aside it is interesting how you had to manipulate the url of the
upstream tracker to get the upstream bug task added.  This may be a bug
in Launchpad and I think is worth submitting.  If you do file a bug it
should be about the "malone" project.
 
> Bug 255323: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/wesnoth/+bug/255323
> I would mark this bug as importance Wishlist.

This also is fantastic work!  I like how you gave the reporter details
instructions on how to enable backports to resolve their bug in Hardy.
Mentioning how to only pull in Wesnoth from -backports would have been
even better though.  Linking to the upstream debian bug is also useful
information to provide the reporter and others.  I agree with an
importance of Wishlist for this bug.
 
> Bug 253196: https://bugs.launchpad.net/debian/+source/lyx/+bug/253196
> I would mark this bug as importance Wishlist. However, I may give it
> importance Low if I could confirm that it would indeed fix Bug 157443
> and Bug 94706, which are somewhat alluded to in the upstream
> changelog.

This looks fine to me.  In the event that LyX is updated it'd be great
if you would comment on the other two bugs with information regarding
testing.  Again, I agree with the importance you would give this bug.
 
> Bug 243345: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/wesnoth/+bug/243345
> I would mark this bug as importance Low.

This seems fine too, however I've some concerns about setting the status
to Invalid as it is hidden in the default Launchpad searches.  Another
strategy might have been to leave it Incomplete for a while before
invalidating it.  However, I imagine you searched for other reports like
this before closing it.
 
> Bug 242648: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lyx/+bug/242648

This looks great, I like to see people modifying the bug description,
like you've done, to make the bug report more readable.  Additionally,
making the bug affect the Hardy Backports project was the right thing to
do.
 
> Bug 228067: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lyx/+bug/228067
> I would mark this bug as importance Medium.

Again, this is some fantastic work.  I really enjoy the verbosity of
your comments and the amount of knowledge contained in them.  I
personally think that bug comments can be an excellent way to educate
people regarding Ubuntu and processes we use and find your comments very
educational.
 
I'll approve your membership in the team and I'm happy to have you as a
member!

-- 
Brian Murray                                                 @ubuntu.com

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature