ubuntu-bugcontrol team mailing list archive

[Brian Murray <brian@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 06:08:16PM -0400, Mathew Hodson wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> On 15-08-12 03:06 PM, Brian Murray wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 05:11:16PM -0400, Mathew Hodson wrote:
> >> I'm Mathew Hodson (mathew-hodson), and I have be helping out with
> >> Ubuntu bugs in my spare time for about a year. I would like to
> >> join the Bug Control team.
> > 
> > Great! I've seen your work and was hoping that you would apply.
> > 
> >> "Do you promise to be polite to bug reporters even if they are
> >> rude to you or Ubuntu? Have you signed the Ubuntu Code of
> >> Conduct?"
> >> 
> >> I promise to always be polite, and I have signed the Ubuntu Code
> >> of Conduct.
> >> 
> >> "Have you read Bugs/Triage, Bugs/Assignment, Bugs/Status and 
> >> Bugs/Importance? Do you have any questions about that
> >> documentation?"
> >> 
> >> I have read them, and I don't have any questions at this time.
> >> 
> >> "What sensitive data should you look for in a private Apport
> >> crash report bug before making it public? See Bugs/Triage for
> >> more information."
> >> 
> >> Remove Coredump.gz before making the bug public, and check the
> >> stack traces for financial information, login credentials, or
> >> security keys.
> >> 
> >> "Is there a particular package or group of packages that you are 
> >> interested in helping out with?"
> >> 
> >> I am particularly interested in bugs that would be a good
> >> candidate for or are going through the SRU process.
> > 
> > How do you go about determining which bug reports are good
> > candidates for a Stable Release Update? More specifically how do
> > you find these types of bugs in Launchpad.
> 
> If I find bugs that already have a Trusty task, I will add the SRU
> template so that they are more likely to get picked up. I also keep an
> eye out for bugs with a lot of heat or that I have seen complaints
> about on other websites.
> 
> Mostly I check
> http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/pending-sru.html and make
> sure the tags and status are correct and try to verify if I am able.
> 
> >> Bugs I have worked on:
> >> 
> >> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/bash-completion/+bug/1358154
> >>
> >> 
> Confirmed that the fix was incorrect and identified the proper fix.
> >> Importance Low because it is not essential for use of the
> >> application.
> > 
> > Given that the bug is not in fact fixed, the status of the task
> > should not be Fixed Released. Additionally, given that the intent
> > was to fix the bug in Vivid, there should probably be a task for
> > Vivid. Otherwise, your work here looks good.
> > 
> >> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apparmor/+bug/1296218 
> >> Confirmed issue still existed on Trusty and reproduced with log. 
> >> Importance Medium because it has a severe impact on a non-core
> >> application.
> > 
> > This looks good to me and I've reopened the task. I forget if there
> > are permissions associated with reopening a bug task - is changing
> > a bug task away from Fix Released not something that you can do?
> 
> Thanks for fixing the status on those bugs. I mentioned them in
> #ubuntu-bugs, but that channel doesn't seem to get a lot of activity.

If you can't get a hold of anybody feel free to ping me on the channel
or directly.

> Only members can move from Won't Fix or Fix Released, and only members
> can add a task for a specific release.

Ah, I'd forgotten about moving away from Fix Released. Thanks!

--
Brian Murray

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature