[rfc] how to route packaging-specific bugs?

[John Arbash Meinel]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Martin Pool wrote:
> We get a few bugs like <https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/407074> that
> are specific to bzr platform packaging.  The platform or package
> maintainers are probably best placed to investigate them, triage or
> fix them.  However I'm concerned that the overall number of bugs is so
> high that people might not be able to find them.
> 
> Would any package maintainers comment on how they would like us to handle this?

So for the Windows installer, at least, there is now a separate project
"bzr-windows-installers" which might be a good place to route bugs like
this.


> 
> Options I can think of, in my rough order of preference:
> 
>  * Make teams of people interested in these platforms, and subscribe
> them to bugs that seem relevant, so they'll get mail about only those
> bugs
>  * Subscribe individuals that seem interested in those bugs
>  * Ditto but assign the bug to the team or person.  (I don't like this
> so much because assignment implies they've accepted some
> responsibility and they may not have.)

I don't think 'individuals' is sufficient, and I certainly don't think
we want to subscribe 20 people manually to a bug. I think a team could
be a reasonable compromise. As long as it doesn't end up that I get 4
copies of a given bug report because of teams that I'm on.


>  * Just tag the bugs and let people poll them.  (There is an lp bug
> open about letting people subscribe to a tag but it may not be fixed
> soon.)
>  * Occasionally forward lists of these bugs or individual bugs to the
> general or platform list.  (I do this sometimes now.)
>  * Make separate products for the packaging or the platform and report
> the bug there.  This makes some sense for bugs in the packaging
> itself, especially if it is separated out as Windows now is, but it's
> less good if the bug is just platform-depndent.
>  * Nothing
> 
> What do you think?
> 

There is also the bzr-windows and bzr-mac mailing lists, which seem like
a good start as to where you might want to forward packaging issues. I
realize the mailing lists are probably meant to be more user than
developer focused. Then again, wouldn't a user want to know that there
is a serious packaging issue in the latest package?

John
=:->
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Cygwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAkqwJzYACgkQJdeBCYSNAAPiKACgm9MB0ByqspJ1ddKEWNlqKaVM
bUwAoJsWtoK/AqvEY7CWxwPwLzONyx+z
=ab7U
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----