ubuntu-bugcontrol team mailing list archive

[Brian Murray <brian@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Apr 02, 2020 at 08:16:02AM -0700, Erich Eickmeyer wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> I'm Erich Eickmeyer, leader of the Ubuntu Studio flavor. I've been
> leading Ubuntu Studio for two years, and most people already know me or
> at least who I am in the various ubuntu IRC chatrooms.

Hi Erich, thanks for applying to join the team!

> 
>  1. 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?
>       * Yes, I can continue to be polite. I signed the Code of Conduct
>         many years ago.
> 
>  2. Have you read Bugs/Triage, Bugs/Assignment, Bugs/Status and
>     Bugs/Importance? Do you have any questions about that documentation?
>       * I have read all of those documents and have applied them when
>         triaging bugs for Ubuntu Studio's internal bug reports
> 
>  3. What sensitive data should you look for in a private Apport crash
>     report bug before making it public? See Bugs/Triage for more information
>       * Passwords, bank account information, encryption keys, user
>         names, server names, or anything not related to the application
>         in question.
> 
>  4. Is there a particular package or group of packages that you are
>     interested in helping out with?
>       * In particular, as Ubuntu Studio lead, I need to be able to work
>         with packages in the Ubuntu Studio packageset as well as any
>         package seeded by Ubuntu Studio, and really any package
>         affecting Ubuntu Studio's functionality.
> 
>  5. Bug list:
>       * https://bugs.launchpad.net/linux/+bug/1251065
>           o First bug I ever filed, did it with the help of Alan Pope.
>             Was assigned medium importance in Ubuntu since it was a
>             problem directly in the kerenel and beyond Ubuntu's control,
>             but sent upstream to freedesktop.org as high importance
>             since it affected the video driver in the kernel. Issue was
>             finally fixed roughly 3 years later.

Given that someone could suspend w/o saving a document and then not be
able to resume I think High or Critical would be a more appropriate
importance.

>       * https://bugs.launchpad.net/ufraw/+bug/1768855
>           o Years-old bug for ufraw, which ceased development in 2015
>             and FTBFS in Ubuntu 19.10. Subsequently, ufraw was removed
>             from Debian and Ubuntu's repositories. Commenters only found
>             workarounds by using older packages. Since fixing upstream
>             packages that aren't developed anymore is outside of the
>             scope of Ubuntu, should be marked as "Won't Fix" and have
>             "Medium" importance since it affects the usability of the
>             non-core application.

This bug actually has a patched attached to it which was taken from a
Debian bug and that bug shows this being fixed in ufraw 0.22-4 which is
available in Ubuntu 19.04. While the package has been removed from later
releases of Ubuntu this can and should still be fixed for users of
Ubuntu 18.04 LTS.  Subsequently, the correct status is "Invalid" because
the default bug task is for the development release of Ubuntu and a bug
task should be opened for Bionic with a status of Triaged.

>       * https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mididings/+bug/1775109
>           o Bug was originally filed against Ubuntu Studio itself, and
>             should have been filed against the package, marked as such.
>             Unfortunately, application's development ceased and, per
>             upstream, was forked. However, since it has been removed
>             from the Ubuntu archives, it should be set as "Won't Fix"
>             and have "Medium" importance since the non-core application
>             was not functioning.

I think Invalid is a better status for this bug because the package has
been removed and is not available in the development release of Ubuntu.
It's worth considering whether this too should have a task for Ubuntu
18.04 LTS .

>       * https://bugs.launchpad.net/musescore/+bug/1835847
>           o A feature request bug which I marked as "Invalid" for the
>             Ubuntu package, probably could have remained "New" with
>             "Wishlist" as importance since it was a feature request.
>             Regardless, it was picked-up by the upstream and became a
>             wishlist item for the MuseScore project.

This seems fine, thanks.

>       * https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubuntustudio-installer/+bug/1839182
>           o ubuntustudio-installer, a core application for Ubuntu
>             Studio, had a divide-by-zero error while running. This was
>             worked on very quickly by Len Ovens. Would have been marked
>             as "Confirmed" since it affected multiple people and "High"
>             since it affected an Ubuntu Studio application that provides
>             critical functionality in installing Ubuntu Studio's
>             benefits in other Ubuntu flavors, and the application was
>             failing to function.

This looks good.

>       * https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubuntustudio-controls/+bug/1848785
>           o ubuntustudio-controls is an application that provides much
>             of Ubuntu Studio's core functionality. In this case, it was
>             a simple window size issue that was already in the works. As
>             such, status was marked as "In Progress" and should have had
>             "Medium" priority.

This looks good too, but I'm curious why this was put in backports
rather than uploaded as an SRU.

>       * https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubiquity/+bug/1851346
>           o Ubuntu Studio uses a Ubiquity plugin during install that
>             allows users to fine-tune what is installed rather than the
>             entire default installation. Unfortunately, un-selecting
>             either an entire metapackage or a single package is causing
>             the installer to remove more packages at the end of the
>             installation than intended, or the installation fails
>             altogether. This should be marked as "critical" as it
>             affects a very high portion of Ubuntu Studio's users that
>             wish to tailor Ubuntu Studio for their own use case, and is
>             affecting entire installations, thereby rendering those
>             systems unusable.

This looks good.

>       * https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubuntustudio-installer/+bug/1868855
>           o Another bug found in ubuntustudio-installer. This time the
>             installer GUI was failing, even though the underlying
>             processes were continuing. Unfortunately, that would end-up
>             with the GUI being stuck on the screen until the process was
>             killed. Would have been "High" priority since affected the
>             essential function of the package, which in this case was to
>             provide user feedback of installation progress.

This also looks good.

Based on the general quality of your work I will add you to the Ubuntu
Bug Control team. Going forward though, I'd like it if you were to
consider how the bugs which you are triaging may be fixed in previous
releases of Ubuntu.

Thanks for helping out and welcome to the team!
--
Brian Murray