ubuntu-bugcontrol team mailing list archive

["Serge E. Hallyn" <serge.hallyn@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Quoting Brian Murray (brian@xxxxxxxxxxxxx):
> > # Please list 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 (and explain the reasoning) you would give it after becoming a
> > member of Ubuntu Bug Control. Please use urls in your list of bugs. 
> > 
> > 	https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/postfix/+bug/597510
> > 		I would have placed this one at low priority, as it
> > 		was not really a bug.
> 
> This seems fine and I'd agree with a low priority here.  You might also
> look at http://launchpad.net/bugs/581959 as it is an apport-package bug
> report with the same exit status.

Interesting - and that one itself may be a dupe :)  This one now
actually appears to be a dual bug - the original error was in the
environment, while the new one appears to be a configuration error.

> > 	https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/lucid/+source/qemu-kvm/+bug/588293
> 
> I'd modify the title of this bug report to be very specific as it is
> likely to draw comments about the same symptom with different root
> causes.  Additionally, someone may end up reopening it after it is fixed
> when they see a memory leak in qemu-kvm.  I really appreciate the
> verbosity of your comments in this bug report and documenting tests.

Good idea, hadn't considered that - thanks.

> > 	https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/qemu-kvm/+bug/595427
> > 		I'd place this at low priority, because it can be
> > 		worked around (by installing the distro).
> 
> I'd disagree with the priority for this particular bug as getting people
> to test Ubuntu, which testdrive is one way to do, is very important

That makes sense.  I'd considered thinking along those lines at first,
but decided you needed ubuntu to run testdrive in the first place.  But
of course testing iso's is also important.

> additionally system lock ups like this should be a high priority.  I
> wonder if this is a problem on real hardware.

(I haven't been able to reproduce it on hw.)

> > 	https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libvirt/+bug/595388
> > 		I'd place this at low priority, because it can be
> > 		worked around.
> 
> This seems fine.
>  
> > 	https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libvirt/+bug/594836
> > 		I'd leave this at undecided since we don't yet
> > 		know whether it can be reproduced.
> 
> Your work here looks good.  Due to the large volume of bug reports about
> Ubuntu I recommend setting the importance of a bug report as soon as
> possible, even if you have not been able to recreate it, so that you
> have another mechanism for sorting bug reports.  It is quite easy to
> downgrade the importance later.

Makes sense, I will start doing that.

> Based on the quality of your work I am happy to approve your membership
> in the Ubuntu Bug Control team.

Thanks!

-serge