ubuntu-bugcontrol team mailing list archive

[Brian Murray <brian@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sat, Jul 19, 2014 at 02:23:12AM +0200, Alberto Salvia Novella wrote:
> Daniel Letzeisen:
> > Are you saying that bug control members should focus on confirmed
> > bugs and leave new bugs to other bug squad members?
> 
> Answered in my previous mail, sent at the same time I was receiving
> this one.
> 
> 
> Daniel Letzeisen:
> >Confirmed status can be confused by people who have the same vague
> >symptoms without the root cause (wrong resolution, no sound, etc.).
> 
> How will affect this to not looking at new bugs?
> 
> 
> Daniel Letzeisen:
> > And certain bugs (mostly kernel bugs, I think), automatically get marked
> > Confirmed by a bot run by Brad Figg (which I personally find
> > annoying/unhelpful).
> 
> This is because the bot assumes that if there's a kernel crash the
> bug must be real for sure, so you can easily know that no
> confirmation is needed.

I haven't talked to Brad about this in a while but I'm fairly certain
that any bug task reported by apport is set to Confirmed by his bot, not
just crashes.  They set any new bug without apport information to
Incomplete and ask for data from apport about those bugs.

--
Brian Murray
Ubuntu Bug Master

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature