ubuntu-bugcontrol team mailing list archive

[Charlie Kravetz <cjk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, 11 Mar 2011 09:20:14 -0600
C de-Avillez <hggdh2@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On 03/11/2011 04:27 AM, Roth Robert wrote:
> <snip/>
> 
> >> "One that can easily be worked around by doing something different"
> > 
> > I still wouldn't understand that, as it doesn't explain, how about
> > something like this
> > 
> > "One that can easily be (worked around)/(fixed locally) by the
> > reporter until a developer fixes the problem in the package"
> 
> On 'fixed locally': I do not agree. 'fix' carries a stronger
> meaning: it has been set right, and will not fail again (because of
> that particular issue). A bypass is *not* a fix. A work around is
> *not* a fix.
> 
> > Regarding the rewording of the bug list selection:
> > 
> >> I think this as a result of the fact that triaging can mean the whole
> >> bug life cycle or the process of getting a bug to the Triaged bug
> >> status.  I'm of the opinion that bugs you've touched that already in
> >> Triaged, Fix Committed/Released statuses are the ones we really want to
> >> see as those are the ones that have progressed the furthest in the bug
> >> life cycle - not just bugs that should be set to Triaged.  So maybe the
> >> wording should be:
> > 
> >> "Have a list of bug reports that you have worked on and that demonstrate
> >> that you understand the bug triaging process."
> > 
> > I like this wording more than "Have a list of triaged bugs that
> > demonstrate you understand triaging.", because it does not say triaged
> > bugs explicitly, 
> 
> **********************************************************
> > but still I don't know how to explain concisely that
> > it's not necessarily about bugs the applicant has fixed, 
> **********************************************************
> 
> er, what?
> 
> > but I think
> > that this can easily be understood a bit later, from the Direct
> > application section, 5th bullet: "Please list five or more bugs which
> > you have triaged and include an explanation of your Triage. Please
> > note that these bugs should be representative of your very best work
> > and they should demonstrate your understanding of the triage process
> > and how to properly handle bugs. For all the bugs in the list, please
> > indicate what importance (and explain the reasoning) you would give it
> > after becoming a member of the Ubuntu Bug Control team. Please use
> > urls in your list of bugs."
> 
> > This clarified for me that the application doesn't have to show off
> > bugs fixed by himself/herself, only list bugs to "demonstrate your
> > understanding of the triage process and how to properly handle bugs".

As stated above, "Please list five or more bugs which
you have triaged and include an explanation of your Triage." This really
does state specifically that the bugs must be worked by the applicant,
and not bugs they choose arbitrarily. It will be difficult to word this
more clearly, the bugs _must_ be 5 bugs the individual has worked on.

> 
> I think the major issue is one of misinterpretation, or
> mis-expectation: Bug Control is not about _fixing_ bugs, it is about
> triaging bugs (and triage control). Of course, almost always we are
> doing BOTH activities -- triaging and fixing --, but these are
> *different* processes, with different requirements.
> 
> ..C..
> 


-- 
Charlie Kravetz 
Linux Registered User Number 425914          [http://counter.li.org/]
Never let anyone steal your DREAM.           [http://keepingdreams.com]

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature