ubuntu-bugcontrol team mailing list archive

[Brian Murray <brian@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 11:59:00AM +1000, Null Ack wrote:
> Thanks very much guys :)
> 
> Andreas, with your request for other examples here is a bug that I
> have been triaging as part of my work on Intrepid:
> 
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/264571
> 
> Unlike some other examples, I didn't start this bug, cannot replicate
> it and am actively triaging the issue with the bug reporter.
> 
> Here's another one that I didn't start. I did not agree with a
> previous comment about ignoring the EULA screen and I explained why
> reasons for it. When Mark Shuttleworth came into the bug and asked for
> suggestions about what could possibly be done, I responded with mine
> which he seemed pleased with. It's at:
> 
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/firefox-3.0/+bug/269656
> 
> On the issue with not confirming your own bugs:
> 
> * The documentation specifically states:
> 
> When you have a complete report, and there is enough information to
> debug the program, you can confirm the report. How do you know there
> is enough information? Here are some example criteria, ANY of which is
> sufficient:
> 
>     * Is there a patch that claims to fix the bug?
>     * Are there sufficient log files and crash dumps, as outlined in
> DebuggingProcedures?
>     * Can you reproduce the bug yourself?
>     * Does another distribution have a complete and confirmed bug?
>     * Does the upstream author have a complete and confirmed bug?

Which documentation are you quoting here?
 
-- 
Brian Murray                                                 @ubuntu.com

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature