Directing submitter to use upstream channels instead

[Brad Bollenbach]

On 28-Feb-06, at 8:25 PM, Matthew Paul Thomas wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Feb 28, 2006, at 6:42 AM, Ian Jackson wrote:
>> ...
>> If all upstream bugs should be open in Ubuntu then something should
>> open them (probably, Launchpad automatically).  If, on the other  
>> hand,
>> most bugs shouldn't be open - in particular, if only a small  
>> subset of
>> upstream bugs should be recorded against Ubuntu - then there  
>> should be
>> a way to close a bug that was opened in Ubuntu's bugtracker but which
>> it has now been decided should not have been reported there.
>> ...
>
> Would it work to add a status meaning "We're not interested in  
> fixing the bug here specifically, but we'll happily pick up a fix  
> if/when it appears in an upstream release"?

If enough developers complain about the same issue as Ian, I might  
suggest:

   * a "Patches Welcome" status, though if we keep adding statuses  
and checkboxes for everything, we're going to end up as Bugzilla with  
portlets, and be even harder to figure out

   * using an "upstream" keyword, and/or letting dev teams figure out  
their own policy for dealing with this issue using tagging/ 
categorization

There's also the vague possibility of a magic "defer to upstream"  
button that reprioritizes the task, and does some other things, but  
that reeks of flaming featuritis.

Cheers,

--
Brad Bollenbach