ubuntu-bugcontrol team mailing list archive

[Hew McLachlan <hew.mclachlan@xxxxxxxxx>]

Brian Murray wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 11:06:42AM -0700, Brian Murray wrote:
>   
>> 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?
>>     
>
> I'm still curious about this as I'd like to update it.
The quoted documentation is at
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Bugs/HowToTriage#Confirming

Regards,
Hew McLachlan