* networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org @ 2003-06-27 5:30 David S. Miller 2003-06-27 5:46 ` Martin J. Bligh 0 siblings, 1 reply; 67+ messages in thread From: David S. Miller @ 2003-06-27 5:30 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-kernel; +Cc: linux-net, netdev I would like to ask everyone NOT to use bugme.osdl.org for networking bug reporting any more. It's absolutely the wrong model. When a bug gets filed that way it sort of goes into a black hole that _I_ am forced to process, forward, etc. the bug around and I don't want to be forced to do mindless work like that when it is totally unnecessary. I want people to post the bug to linux-net and netdev and discuss the problem there. And that solves all of the problems. Thanks a lot. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-27 5:30 networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org David S. Miller @ 2003-06-27 5:46 ` Martin J. Bligh 2003-06-27 5:47 ` David S. Miller 0 siblings, 1 reply; 67+ messages in thread From: Martin J. Bligh @ 2003-06-27 5:46 UTC (permalink / raw) To: David S. Miller, linux-kernel; +Cc: linux-net, netdev > I would like to ask everyone NOT to use bugme.osdl.org > for networking bug reporting any more. > > It's absolutely the wrong model. When a bug gets filed that way > it sort of goes into a black hole that _I_ am forced to process, > forward, etc. the bug around and I don't want to be forced to do > mindless work like that when it is totally unnecessary. > > I want people to post the bug to linux-net and netdev and discuss > the problem there. And that solves all of the problems. > > Thanks a lot. I'll take you off the maintainers list, and find someone else to do it for networking. If you want net bugs reported to mailing lists, that's fine. If people choose to file bugs in bugzilla as well, they'll still be processed by someone. M. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-27 5:46 ` Martin J. Bligh @ 2003-06-27 5:47 ` David S. Miller 2003-06-27 7:59 ` Matti Aarnio ` (2 more replies) 0 siblings, 3 replies; 67+ messages in thread From: David S. Miller @ 2003-06-27 5:47 UTC (permalink / raw) To: mbligh; +Cc: linux-kernel, linux-net, netdev From: "Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@aracnet.com> Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 22:46:10 -0700 If people choose to file bugs in bugzilla as well, they'll still be processed by someone. Just so that someone can post them to the lists? That sounds like a completely silly way to operate. I'd rather they get posted to the lists _ONLY_. This way not that "someone", but "everyone" on the lists can participate and contribute to responding to the bug. The only way you can make things scale is if you throw a group of people into the collective of folks able to respond to a problem. If it all gets filtered through by one guy, THAT DOES NOT WORK. That one guy limits what can be done, and when he's busy one day or he goes away on vacation for a while, the whole assembly line stops. Therefore, please eliminate the networking category on bugme.osdl.org and we'll process bug reports on the lists so that not _ONE_ but the whole community of networking developers can look at the bug. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-27 5:47 ` David S. Miller @ 2003-06-27 7:59 ` Matti Aarnio 2003-06-27 8:00 ` David S. Miller 2003-06-27 15:00 ` Martin J. Bligh 2003-06-27 14:34 ` Martin J. Bligh 2003-06-27 18:50 ` Ben Greear 2 siblings, 2 replies; 67+ messages in thread From: Matti Aarnio @ 2003-06-27 7:59 UTC (permalink / raw) To: David S. Miller; +Cc: mbligh, linux-kernel, linux-net, netdev On Thu, Jun 26, 2003 at 10:47:39PM -0700, David S. Miller wrote: > From: "Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@aracnet.com> > Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 22:46:10 -0700 > > If people choose to file bugs in bugzilla as well, they'll still be > processed by someone. > > Just so that someone can post them to the lists? > That sounds like a completely silly way to operate. > > I'd rather they get posted to the lists _ONLY_. I have recently pondered usage of Request Tracker for this kind of tasks. The problem with "post to the list" is that sometimes things slip thru without anybody catching them. Integrating linux-kernel and RT ... urgh.. result would be quite ugly. (Flame wars and out-of-topic threads going on as requests...) > This way not that "someone", but "everyone" on the lists > can participate and contribute to responding to the bug. That needs merely message arriving to the list. Ok, responding so that the response appears also at the bug db is another story. > The only way you can make things scale is if you throw a group > of people into the collective of folks able to respond to a problem. > > If it all gets filtered through by one guy, THAT DOES NOT WORK. > That one guy limits what can be done, and when he's busy one day > or he goes away on vacation for a while, the whole assembly > line stops. Bugzilla could be adapted to this use: - Bugs are to be assigned to, e.g. linux-net/netdev list - Everybody can comment on them at bugme (after signing on) - Only some meta-admin (and original bug creator) can alter status (e.g. mark as RESOLVED) Having plenty of bugme group admins (half a dozen or so) to do the initial bugzilla assigment work, those people taking the task seriously, and everybody of them going en masse to assign arrived things. That way people can have time off - as long as they coordinate among themselves. The minus (and plus) is, of course, that the entire discussion flowing at the list doesn't go to the bug database, but that doesn't invalidate mechanisms existence as a way to avoid slipping things thru the cracks. > Therefore, please eliminate the networking category on bugme.osdl.org > and we'll process bug reports on the lists so that not _ONE_ but the > whole community of networking developers can look at the bug. I thought you don't need to login to see things in bugzilla ? .. and proved it by looking into bugme.. http://bugme.osdl.org/show_bug.cgi?id=853 In addition to assinging an OWNER to the bug, there should be automatic assignment of linux-net or netdev as Cc, IMO... That will handle the "publish widely" issue that DaveM is complaining about. /Matti Aarnio ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-27 7:59 ` Matti Aarnio @ 2003-06-27 8:00 ` David S. Miller 2003-06-27 15:00 ` Martin J. Bligh 1 sibling, 0 replies; 67+ messages in thread From: David S. Miller @ 2003-06-27 8:00 UTC (permalink / raw) To: matti.aarnio; +Cc: mbligh, linux-kernel, linux-net, netdev From: Matti Aarnio <matti.aarnio@zmailer.org> Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 10:59:14 +0300 The problem with "post to the list" is that sometimes things slip thru without anybody catching them. It is not a problem, it is a feature. What will happen is the same thing that happens if Linus drops a patch. It'll get retransmitted if the reporter cares about the bug. If he doesn't, the one of two things: 1) the bug actually isn't that important 2) it is important, and someone else will report the bug too Therefore important issues tend to keep showing up, even if they are not attended to the first time around. This repeated reporting and patch sending may seem like useless work, but this is not true, it is actually a form of validation. I thought you don't need to login to see things in bugzilla ? That's not the issue. Asking people who want to help to read a list or two, isn't much to ask. Getting them to click around some web site every day adds to the overhead. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-27 7:59 ` Matti Aarnio 2003-06-27 8:00 ` David S. Miller @ 2003-06-27 15:00 ` Martin J. Bligh 1 sibling, 0 replies; 67+ messages in thread From: Martin J. Bligh @ 2003-06-27 15:00 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Matti Aarnio, David S. Miller; +Cc: linux-kernel, linux-net, netdev > I have recently pondered usage of Request Tracker for this > kind of tasks. The problem with "post to the list" is that > sometimes things slip thru without anybody catching them. > > Integrating linux-kernel and RT ... urgh.. result would > be quite ugly. (Flame wars and out-of-topic threads going on > as requests...) Yeah, that is tricky ... see below. >> This way not that "someone", but "everyone" on the lists >> can participate and contribute to responding to the bug. > > That needs merely message arriving to the list. That's easy. I actually already hand filter the bugs, and forward to linux-kernel those that seem to have enough information in to be useful to people, and aren't already fixed. There's also a mailing list for seeing every new bug that people can sign up for if they want (send me private email). > Ok, responding so that the response appears also > at the bug db is another story. That is possible to do - there's patches to Bugzilla that implement an email interface, but it has some problems like the one you pointed out above. One possiblility is to make people manually do something to the email for each reply, but that's rather ugly. Hopefully we can discuss this more at OLS this year, and get a plan going forward that people are happy with. I'm well aware that Bugzilla is not the perefect tool, but I think it's better than what we had before (yeah, I know some of us disagree), and is easy to change. I'd rather start with something simple, and evolve it to the needs of the community than try dumping something complex onto people up front. > Bugzilla could be adapted to this use: > - Bugs are to be assigned to, e.g. linux-net/netdev list > - Everybody can comment on them at bugme (after signing on) > - Only some meta-admin (and original bug creator) can > alter status (e.g. mark as RESOLVED) > > Having plenty of bugme group admins (half a dozen or so) to do > the initial bugzilla assigment work, those people taking the task > seriously, and everybody of them going en masse to assign arrived > things. That way people can have time off - as long as they > coordinate among themselves. Yup, that's easy to set up if you like. Or we can do it as a new list if you prefer. > In addition to assinging an OWNER to the bug, there should be > automatic assignment of linux-net or netdev as Cc, IMO... > That will handle the "publish widely" issue that DaveM is > complaining about. There's a QA field we can hack into doing that easily, but I want to ensure people are happy auto-cc'ing lists before I do it. Or I can forward the relevant ones by hand if you prefer. If it's going to piss people off more than it makes them happy, it's not worth it though. Moreover, the bugme default owner doesn't have to be the code maintainer, so if Dave wants someone else to do the "bug shuffling" stuff, that's another way to go. M. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-27 5:47 ` David S. Miller 2003-06-27 7:59 ` Matti Aarnio @ 2003-06-27 14:34 ` Martin J. Bligh 2003-06-27 14:56 ` Davide Libenzi 2003-06-27 18:50 ` Ben Greear 2 siblings, 1 reply; 67+ messages in thread From: Martin J. Bligh @ 2003-06-27 14:34 UTC (permalink / raw) To: David S. Miller; +Cc: linux-kernel, linux-net, netdev > If people choose to file bugs in bugzilla as well, they'll still be > processed by someone. > > Just so that someone can post them to the lists? > That sounds like a completely silly way to operate. > > I'd rather they get posted to the lists _ONLY_. > > This way not that "someone", but "everyone" on the lists > can participate and contribute to responding to the bug. > > The only way you can make things scale is if you throw a group > of people into the collective of folks able to respond to a problem. We can do that. The owner of a category can be a mailing list (eg the bugme-janitors list for some of the categories). > If it all gets filtered through by one guy, THAT DOES NOT WORK. > That one guy limits what can be done, and when he's busy one day > or he goes away on vacation for a while, the whole assembly > line stops. The idea is to spread it across categories (one person for each (or a few) categories), but if you want to spread it around within a category that's possible too. > Therefore, please eliminate the networking category on bugme.osdl.org > and we'll process bug reports on the lists so that not _ONE_ but the > whole community of networking developers can look at the bug. No. If you don't want to participate, that's fine, but I'm not going to prevent other people from doing so. If you want me to forward the bugs to any given list, I'll do that. If you want to just tell people to file them to a list, that's fine too. But I won't destroy the generic model just because you don't like it. M. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-27 14:34 ` Martin J. Bligh @ 2003-06-27 14:56 ` Davide Libenzi 2003-06-27 21:37 ` David S. Miller 0 siblings, 1 reply; 67+ messages in thread From: Davide Libenzi @ 2003-06-27 14:56 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Martin J. Bligh Cc: David S. Miller, Linux Kernel Mailing List, linux-net, netdev On Fri, 27 Jun 2003, Martin J. Bligh wrote: > No. If you don't want to participate, that's fine, but I'm not going > to prevent other people from doing so. > > If you want me to forward the bugs to any given list, I'll do that. > If you want to just tell people to file them to a list, that's fine too. > But I won't destroy the generic model just because you don't like it. A bug tracking system stick you on a bug and makes all this to look like real work, that's why maybe David does not like it :) Kidding ;) The good of a bug tracking system against the mailing list is that bugs do survive in a bug tracking system, while they usually vanish for normal underlooked posts. Many ppl posting bugs are not members of the mailing list and they are not usually setting up a repost timer if the bug does not get answered. I believe that it should be both ways. Posts on the mailing list helps main maintainers to lower the load by allowing others to take on bugs, while the bug tracking helps unresolved bugs to stick. - Davide ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-27 14:56 ` Davide Libenzi @ 2003-06-27 21:37 ` David S. Miller 2003-06-27 21:54 ` Ben Greear 2003-06-27 22:02 ` Davide Libenzi 0 siblings, 2 replies; 67+ messages in thread From: David S. Miller @ 2003-06-27 21:37 UTC (permalink / raw) To: davidel; +Cc: mbligh, linux-kernel, linux-net, netdev From: Davide Libenzi <davidel@xmailserver.org> Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 07:56:16 -0700 (PDT) The good of a bug tracking system against the mailing list is that bugs do survive in a bug tracking system, No, this is the _BAD_ part, shit accumulates equally with useful reports. Useful reports in non-bugtracking system environments get retransmitted and eventually looked at. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-27 21:37 ` David S. Miller @ 2003-06-27 21:54 ` Ben Greear 2003-06-27 21:54 ` David S. Miller 2003-06-27 22:02 ` Davide Libenzi 1 sibling, 1 reply; 67+ messages in thread From: Ben Greear @ 2003-06-27 21:54 UTC (permalink / raw) To: David S. Miller; +Cc: davidel, mbligh, linux-kernel, linux-net, netdev David S. Miller wrote: > From: Davide Libenzi <davidel@xmailserver.org> > Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 07:56:16 -0700 (PDT) > > The good of a bug tracking system against the mailing list is that > bugs do survive in a bug tracking system, > > No, this is the _BAD_ part, shit accumulates equally with > useful reports. > > Useful reports in non-bugtracking system environments get > retransmitted and eventually looked at. I think you are putting too much work on the bug reporter(s). If you want to ignore bug reports that only happen once, feel free, but give the rest of us a way to easily keep a history and list of bug reports. For instance, where is the list of open networking bugs for 2.4 now? -- Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> <Ben_Greear AT excite.com> President of Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com ScryMUD: http://scry.wanfear.com http://scry.wanfear.com/~greear ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-27 21:54 ` Ben Greear @ 2003-06-27 21:54 ` David S. Miller 2003-06-27 22:15 ` Ben Greear 0 siblings, 1 reply; 67+ messages in thread From: David S. Miller @ 2003-06-27 21:54 UTC (permalink / raw) To: greearb; +Cc: davidel, mbligh, linux-kernel, linux-net, netdev From: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 14:54:26 -0700 I think you are putting too much work on the bug reporter(s). Don't even talk to me about too much work. Someone wants me to spend hours groveling through some pieces of code to track down some tricky bug, for free, and all I ask is that they retransmit the bug every once in a while if they don't see any response? Give me a frigging break. If they're not willing to do this, they DON'T care about the bug. Just like if people aren't willing to retransmit patches they want installed, they DON'T care about the patch. And just like I don't want to apply patches people don't care about, I don't want any of my contributors looking at bugs that the bug reporter doesn't care about. Just like with patches, I want to know that people are going to stick around and be responsive if I need to get information from them when a bug is reported. If they're not willing to retransmit the report every one in a while, why should I believe they will? Ben, you absolutely don't understand how all of this development works and what it relies upon to function properly. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-27 21:54 ` David S. Miller @ 2003-06-27 22:15 ` Ben Greear 2003-06-27 22:19 ` David S. Miller 0 siblings, 1 reply; 67+ messages in thread From: Ben Greear @ 2003-06-27 22:15 UTC (permalink / raw) To: David S. Miller; +Cc: davidel, mbligh, linux-kernel, linux-net, netdev David S. Miller wrote: > From: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> > Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 14:54:26 -0700 > > I think you are putting too much work on the bug reporter(s). > > Don't even talk to me about too much work. > > Someone wants me to spend hours groveling through some pieces of code > to track down some tricky bug, for free, and all I ask is that they > retransmit the bug every once in a while if they don't see any > response? I don't care if you completely ignore the bugzilla, just let the rest of us lesser mortals use it. There's always the chance we will find something we can fix and actually lessen your load. > If they're not willing to do this, they DON'T care about the bug. > Just like if people aren't willing to retransmit patches they want > installed, they DON'T care about the patch. And just like I don't > want to apply patches people don't care about, I don't want any of my > contributors looking at bugs that the bug reporter doesn't care about. Forcing people to continue to retransmit the same report just pisses people off, and in the end will get you less useful reports than if you had flagged the report as 'please-gimme-more-info'. And, most people, especially the savvy ones, will find some sort of work-around and keep going. That didn't fix the problem, it just made it invisible again untill the next person hits it. > Ben, you absolutely don't understand how all of this development works > and what it relies upon to function properly. Perhaps, but it's also possible that you are being a stubborn SOB because you fear change :) Ben -- Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> <Ben_Greear AT excite.com> President of Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com ScryMUD: http://scry.wanfear.com http://scry.wanfear.com/~greear ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-27 22:15 ` Ben Greear @ 2003-06-27 22:19 ` David S. Miller 2003-06-27 22:36 ` Ben Greear 2003-06-27 23:08 ` Alan Cox 0 siblings, 2 replies; 67+ messages in thread From: David S. Miller @ 2003-06-27 22:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: greearb; +Cc: davidel, mbligh, linux-kernel, linux-net, netdev From: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 15:15:07 -0700 Forcing people to continue to retransmit the same report just pisses people off, and in the end will get you less useful reports than if you had flagged the report as 'please-gimme-more-info'. And this is different from patch submission in what way? Perhaps, but it's also possible that you are being a stubborn SOB because you fear change :) Absolutely not, in fact I'm daily looking for ways to change how I work with people who help me so that I scale better. And I know for sure that a bug datamase with shit that accumulates in it that _REQUIRES_ me to do something about it to make it go away does not help me scale. Bugme was an absolute burdon for me. For something to scale, it must continute to operate just as efficiently if I were to go away for a few weeks. The lists have that quality, the bug database with owner does not. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-27 22:19 ` David S. Miller @ 2003-06-27 22:36 ` Ben Greear 2003-06-28 0:00 ` David S. Miller 2003-06-27 23:08 ` Alan Cox 1 sibling, 1 reply; 67+ messages in thread From: Ben Greear @ 2003-06-27 22:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: David S. Miller; +Cc: davidel, mbligh, linux-kernel, linux-net, netdev David S. Miller wrote: > From: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> > Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 15:15:07 -0700 > > Forcing people to continue to retransmit the same report just pisses > people off, and in the end will get you less useful reports than if > you had flagged the report as 'please-gimme-more-info'. > > And this is different from patch submission in what way? It wouldn't bother me to have a list of all patches submitted either, it would keep folks from re-implementing the same thing from time to time. However, the main difference is that having to cary patches forward is a constant drag on the person with the patch that was not accepted, so they are constantly aware of how nice it would be to get it included..thus they may keep trying. A user with a PCMCIA NIC that reorders packets can get another NIC, so that bug will never re-transmitted, and it will never get fixed. What is worse, new users of that busted NIC will have to re-discover that all over for themselves, because there is no bug database to search. > > Perhaps, but it's also possible that you are being a stubborn SOB > because you fear change :) > > Absolutely not, in fact I'm daily looking for ways to change how > I work with people who help me so that I scale better. And I know > for sure that a bug datamase with shit that accumulates in it > that _REQUIRES_ me to do something about it to make it go away > does not help me scale. > > Bugme was an absolute burdon for me. > > For something to scale, it must continute to operate just as > efficiently if I were to go away for a few weeks. The lists have that > quality, the bug database with owner does not. So, you'd be happy so long as bugz sent mail to the netdev mailing lists instead of to you? -- Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> <Ben_Greear AT excite.com> President of Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com ScryMUD: http://scry.wanfear.com http://scry.wanfear.com/~greear ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-27 22:36 ` Ben Greear @ 2003-06-28 0:00 ` David S. Miller 2003-06-28 0:15 ` Martin J. Bligh 2003-06-28 0:19 ` Larry McVoy 0 siblings, 2 replies; 67+ messages in thread From: David S. Miller @ 2003-06-28 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) To: greearb; +Cc: davidel, mbligh, linux-kernel, linux-net, netdev From: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 15:36:30 -0700 So, you'd be happy so long as bugz sent mail to the netdev mailing lists instead of to you? The best power I have to scale is the delete key in my email reader, when I delete an email it's gone and that's it. bugme bugs don't have this attribute, they are like emails that persist forever until someone does something about them, and this is the big problem I have with it. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-28 0:00 ` David S. Miller @ 2003-06-28 0:15 ` Martin J. Bligh 2003-06-28 0:32 ` David S. Miller 2003-06-28 0:19 ` Larry McVoy 1 sibling, 1 reply; 67+ messages in thread From: Martin J. Bligh @ 2003-06-28 0:15 UTC (permalink / raw) To: David S. Miller, greearb; +Cc: davidel, linux-kernel, linux-net, netdev --"David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com> wrote (on Friday, June 27, 2003 17:00:22 -0700): > From: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> > Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 15:36:30 -0700 > > So, you'd be happy so long as bugz sent mail to the netdev mailing > lists instead of to you? > > The best power I have to scale is the delete key in my email > reader, when I delete an email it's gone and that's it. > > bugme bugs don't have this attribute, they are like emails that > persist forever until someone does something about them, and this is > the big problem I have with it. Right ... but if bugs were sent to netdev or whatever, you'd get something similar to what you have today, as long as *you* don't go looking in bugme (which you've made it clear you won't). Other people seem to find this useful, and they can still go use it if they like. So presumably that'd work out OK? M. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-28 0:15 ` Martin J. Bligh @ 2003-06-28 0:32 ` David S. Miller 0 siblings, 0 replies; 67+ messages in thread From: David S. Miller @ 2003-06-28 0:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: mbligh; +Cc: greearb, davidel, linux-kernel, linux-net, netdev From: "Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@aracnet.com> Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 17:15:50 -0700 So presumably that'd work out OK? Yes, people can go live in their own bugme world if they want to, I can't force people not to use it. But a bug database that the actual maintainers refuse to use seems quite pointless to me. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-28 0:00 ` David S. Miller 2003-06-28 0:15 ` Martin J. Bligh @ 2003-06-28 0:19 ` Larry McVoy 2003-06-28 0:27 ` Martin J. Bligh 1 sibling, 1 reply; 67+ messages in thread From: Larry McVoy @ 2003-06-28 0:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: David S. Miller; +Cc: greearb, davidel, mbligh, linux-kernel, linux-net, netdev On Fri, Jun 27, 2003 at 05:00:22PM -0700, David S. Miller wrote: > From: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> > Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 15:36:30 -0700 > > So, you'd be happy so long as bugz sent mail to the netdev mailing > lists instead of to you? > > The best power I have to scale is the delete key in my email > reader, when I delete an email it's gone and that's it. > > bugme bugs don't have this attribute, they are like emails that > persist forever until someone does something about them, and this is > the big problem I have with it. I've proposed this before and nobody listened but maybe this time... I think what you want is a bug database which distinguishes between filed bugs and reviewed bugs. You want to capture all bug reports, as Alan says (he's right, there is no question about it, you need to capture the data). You also want an *automatic* way for bugs to just rot. Anyone can file a bug but unless someone with expertise in the area reviews the bug and agrees to do something about it, the bug rots. It's level 1 (capture) and level 2 (we really need to do something about this some day). Level 1 will have zillions of duplicates and tons of other noise. Level 2 should be a small list, no duplicates, carefully managed. -- --- Larry McVoy lm at bitmover.com http://www.bitmover.com/lm ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-28 0:19 ` Larry McVoy @ 2003-06-28 0:27 ` Martin J. Bligh 2003-06-28 19:20 ` Alan Cox 0 siblings, 1 reply; 67+ messages in thread From: Martin J. Bligh @ 2003-06-28 0:27 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Larry McVoy, David S. Miller Cc: greearb, davidel, linux-kernel, linux-net, netdev --Larry McVoy <lm@bitmover.com> wrote (on Friday, June 27, 2003 17:19:54 -0700): > On Fri, Jun 27, 2003 at 05:00:22PM -0700, David S. Miller wrote: >> From: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> >> Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 15:36:30 -0700 >> >> So, you'd be happy so long as bugz sent mail to the netdev mailing >> lists instead of to you? >> >> The best power I have to scale is the delete key in my email >> reader, when I delete an email it's gone and that's it. >> >> bugme bugs don't have this attribute, they are like emails that >> persist forever until someone does something about them, and this is >> the big problem I have with it. > > I've proposed this before and nobody listened but maybe this time... > > I think what you want is a bug database which distinguishes between > filed bugs and reviewed bugs. You want to capture all bug reports, > as Alan says (he's right, there is no question about it, you need to > capture the data). You also want an *automatic* way for bugs to just > rot. Anyone can file a bug but unless someone with expertise in the > area reviews the bug and agrees to do something about it, the bug rots. > > It's level 1 (capture) and level 2 (we really need to do something about > this some day). Level 1 will have zillions of duplicates and tons of > other noise. Level 2 should be a small list, no duplicates, carefully > managed. That's a trivial change to make if you want it. we just add a "reviewed" / "certified" state between "new" and "assigned". Yes, might be a good idea. I'm not actually that convinced that "assigned" is overly useful in the context of open-source, but that's a separate discussion. I'm hoping to get a discussion going at Kernel Summit / OLS on how people want this to evolve, I'll add this one to the list ... thanks. M. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-28 0:27 ` Martin J. Bligh @ 2003-06-28 19:20 ` Alan Cox 2003-06-29 0:40 ` Daniel Jacobowitz 2003-06-29 0:44 ` Martin J. Bligh 0 siblings, 2 replies; 67+ messages in thread From: Alan Cox @ 2003-06-28 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Martin J. Bligh Cc: Larry McVoy, David S. Miller, greearb, davidel, Linux Kernel Mailing List, linux-net, netdev On Sad, 2003-06-28 at 01:27, Martin J. Bligh wrote: > That's a trivial change to make if you want it. we just add a "reviewed" > / "certified" state between "new" and "assigned". Yes, might be a good > idea. I'm not actually that convinced that "assigned" is overly useful > in the context of open-source, but that's a separate discussion. Most bugzilla's seem to use VERIFIED for this, and it means people who have better things to do can just pull bugs that are verified and/or tagged with "patch" in the attachments ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-28 19:20 ` Alan Cox @ 2003-06-29 0:40 ` Daniel Jacobowitz 2003-06-29 0:44 ` Martin J. Bligh 1 sibling, 0 replies; 67+ messages in thread From: Daniel Jacobowitz @ 2003-06-29 0:40 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Linux Kernel Mailing List On Sat, Jun 28, 2003 at 08:20:53PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > On Sad, 2003-06-28 at 01:27, Martin J. Bligh wrote: > > That's a trivial change to make if you want it. we just add a "reviewed" > > / "certified" state between "new" and "assigned". Yes, might be a good > > idea. I'm not actually that convinced that "assigned" is overly useful > > in the context of open-source, but that's a separate discussion. > > Most bugzilla's seem to use VERIFIED for this, and it means people who > have better things to do can just pull bugs that are verified and/or > tagged with "patch" in the attachments GCC just calls this "UNCONFIRMED" vs. "NEW", which seems to work well. A lot of the maintainers don't look at Bugzilla at all, and a lot of the rest filter out UNCONFIRMED. A couple of interested (and dumbfoundingly dedicated) people review and confirm bugs; that's less possible with the Linux kernel, since bugs often require hardware to reproduce, but the principle is still sound. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-28 19:20 ` Alan Cox 2003-06-29 0:40 ` Daniel Jacobowitz @ 2003-06-29 0:44 ` Martin J. Bligh 1 sibling, 0 replies; 67+ messages in thread From: Martin J. Bligh @ 2003-06-29 0:44 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Alan Cox Cc: Larry McVoy, David S. Miller, greearb, davidel, Linux Kernel Mailing List, linux-net, netdev --Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote (on Saturday, June 28, 2003 20:20:53 +0100): > On Sad, 2003-06-28 at 01:27, Martin J. Bligh wrote: >> That's a trivial change to make if you want it. we just add a "reviewed" >> / "certified" state between "new" and "assigned". Yes, might be a good >> idea. I'm not actually that convinced that "assigned" is overly useful >> in the context of open-source, but that's a separate discussion. > > Most bugzilla's seem to use VERIFIED for this, and it means people who > have better things to do can just pull bugs that are verified and/or > tagged with "patch" in the attachments Hmmm. we have VERIFIED set up to mean that the proposed fix has been verified to work. Could reshuffle it, or we could find a different word I guess - reusing the same one might cause confusion (on the other hand ...using the same word for different things in different bugzillas is confusing too ...) M. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-27 22:19 ` David S. Miller 2003-06-27 22:36 ` Ben Greear @ 2003-06-27 23:08 ` Alan Cox 2003-06-28 0:21 ` David S. Miller 1 sibling, 1 reply; 67+ messages in thread From: Alan Cox @ 2003-06-27 23:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: David S. Miller Cc: greearb, davidel, mbligh, Linux Kernel Mailing List, linux-net, netdev On Gwe, 2003-06-27 at 23:19, David S. Miller wrote: > Forcing people to continue to retransmit the same report just pisses > people off, and in the end will get you less useful reports than if > you had flagged the report as 'please-gimme-more-info'. > > And this is different from patch submission in what way? Tried doing an SQL query or text analysis for similarities on random messages lurking in private mailboxes or mixed up in list archives. Its really hard. Now try doing that with bugzilla and its really easy. Nobody is saying "Dave shall use bugzilla", maybe you can find an underling to care, maybe the only time you want to use it is to say "thats really freaky, who else is seeing it and what hardware" >From Red Hat bugzilla I've done statistical analysis of IDE failure patterns, I've also dug up year old mislaid patches that would have been lost forever otherwise because the one person who fixed it was missed in the noise, even though lots of the noise was people hitting that same bug ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-27 23:08 ` Alan Cox @ 2003-06-28 0:21 ` David S. Miller 2003-06-28 19:19 ` Alan Cox 0 siblings, 1 reply; 67+ messages in thread From: David S. Miller @ 2003-06-28 0:21 UTC (permalink / raw) To: alan; +Cc: greearb, davidel, mbligh, linux-kernel, linux-net, netdev From: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> Date: 28 Jun 2003 00:08:56 +0100 Tried doing an SQL query or text analysis for similarities on random messages lurking in private mailboxes I respond to private reports with "please send this to the lists, what if I were on vacation for the next month?" I never actually process or analyze such reports. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-28 0:21 ` David S. Miller @ 2003-06-28 19:19 ` Alan Cox 2003-06-28 22:03 ` David S. Miller 0 siblings, 1 reply; 67+ messages in thread From: Alan Cox @ 2003-06-28 19:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: David S. Miller Cc: greearb, davidel, mbligh, Linux Kernel Mailing List, linux-net, netdev On Sad, 2003-06-28 at 01:21, David S. Miller wrote: > From: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> > Date: 28 Jun 2003 00:08:56 +0100 > > Tried doing an SQL query or text analysis for similarities on random > messages lurking in private mailboxes > > I respond to private reports with "please send this to the lists, > what if I were on vacation for the next month?" I never actually > process or analyze such reports. Which means you miss stuff. Here is an example my tools found yesterday 18 months ago someone with a specific printer reported doing network printing to it crashed the kernel. Lost in the noise, filed in bugzilla, categorised mentally at the time as "weird". Not long ago a second identical report popped up. Different setup, same network printing, similar "it reboots" report. So now I've gone chasing tcpdumps from these. Its a *different* thing to the kind of patch management you are doing, but its only possible because of tools like bugzilla ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-28 19:19 ` Alan Cox @ 2003-06-28 22:03 ` David S. Miller 2003-06-28 23:15 ` Alan Cox 2003-07-12 17:07 ` Jan Rychter 0 siblings, 2 replies; 67+ messages in thread From: David S. Miller @ 2003-06-28 22:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: alan; +Cc: greearb, davidel, mbligh, linux-kernel, linux-net, netdev From: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> Date: 28 Jun 2003 20:19:32 +0100 On Sad, 2003-06-28 at 01:21, David S. Miller wrote: > I respond to private reports with "please send this to the lists, > what if I were on vacation for the next month?" I never actually > process or analyze such reports. Which means you miss stuff. Not my problem Alan. If the user gives a crap about their report mattering, they'll do what I ask them to do. If users send their report to the wrong place, it will get lost, just like if their cat their report into /dev/null. I have no reason to feel bad about the information getting lost. If it's too much for them to do as I ask, it's too much for me to consider their report. Bug reporting, just like patch submission, is a 2 way street. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-28 22:03 ` David S. Miller @ 2003-06-28 23:15 ` Alan Cox 2003-06-28 23:20 ` David S. Miller 2003-07-12 17:07 ` Jan Rychter 1 sibling, 1 reply; 67+ messages in thread From: Alan Cox @ 2003-06-28 23:15 UTC (permalink / raw) To: David S. Miller Cc: greearb, davidel, mbligh, Linux Kernel Mailing List, linux-net, netdev On Sad, 2003-06-28 at 23:03, David S. Miller wrote: > Not my problem Alan. If the user gives a crap about their report > mattering, they'll do what I ask them to do. If users send their > report to the wrong place, it will get lost, just like if their > cat their report into /dev/null. I have no reason to feel bad about > the information getting lost. You might not care but some of us do. Capturing the data matters for lots of things. That you don't have the time to be the filter for that info for networking is also fine. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-28 23:15 ` Alan Cox @ 2003-06-28 23:20 ` David S. Miller 2003-06-28 23:46 ` Alan Cox 0 siblings, 1 reply; 67+ messages in thread From: David S. Miller @ 2003-06-28 23:20 UTC (permalink / raw) To: alan; +Cc: greearb, davidel, mbligh, linux-kernel, linux-net, netdev From: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> Date: 29 Jun 2003 00:15:38 +0100 You might not care but some of us do. Capturing the data matters for lots of things. That you don't have the time to be the filter for that info for networking is also fine. Alan, you really stretch yourself thin doing this stuff all the time. Now imagine if you invested this effort in educating people and getting them to be better bug reporters, sending the right info to the right place? I think that, along with some actual development I actually miss seeing you be able to do that, is a much better allocation of your time and talents. You're grovelling at the bottom of the barrel, it's time to start skimming from the top instead. Things that matters will come back, it doesn't disappear. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-28 23:20 ` David S. Miller @ 2003-06-28 23:46 ` Alan Cox 0 siblings, 0 replies; 67+ messages in thread From: Alan Cox @ 2003-06-28 23:46 UTC (permalink / raw) To: David S. Miller Cc: greearb, davidel, mbligh, Linux Kernel Mailing List, linux-net, netdev On Sul, 2003-06-29 at 00:20, David S. Miller wrote: > Now imagine if you invested this effort in educating people > and getting them to be better bug reporters, sending the > right info to the right place? For IDE the statistical value of being able to go digging through old data has been more than worth the effort. Similarly writing tools to do the grovelling has a clear value. > You're grovelling at the bottom of the barrel, it's time to start > skimming from the top instead. Things that matters will come back, it > doesn't disappear. I'm trying to turn grovelling into barrels into an automated process. Thats much more useful and also entertaining (things like oops matching and gdb trace matching turn out to be interesting little problems of their own) Alan ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-28 22:03 ` David S. Miller 2003-06-28 23:15 ` Alan Cox @ 2003-07-12 17:07 ` Jan Rychter 2003-07-13 4:15 ` Greg KH 2003-07-13 5:22 ` networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org David S. Miller 1 sibling, 2 replies; 67+ messages in thread From: Jan Rychter @ 2003-07-12 17:07 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-kernel; +Cc: linux-net, netdev [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3095 bytes --] >>>>> "David" == David S Miller <davem@redhat.com> writes: David> From: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> Date: 28 Jun 2003 David> 20:19:32 +0100 David> On Sad, 2003-06-28 at 01:21, David S. Miller wrote: >> I respond to private reports with "please send this to the lists, >> what if I were on vacation for the next month?" I never actually >> process or analyze such reports. David> Which means you miss stuff. David> Not my problem Alan. If the user gives a crap about their David> report mattering, they'll do what I ask them to do. If users David> send their report to the wrong place, it will get lost, just David> like if their cat their report into /dev/null. I have no reason David> to feel bad about the information getting lost. David> If it's too much for them to do as I ask, it's too much for me David> to consider their report. [...] I think this is one of the largest problems of the current Linux development model. Many people seem to divide people into 'users' (who aren't particularly useful) and 'developers', who actually do something. People (like me), who can devote a _little_ time to narrowing down and reporting bugs fall into the 'user-whiner' class. And get ignored. What results is that you only get bug reports from active developers. Which means that rare bugs don't get fixed. David> It is not a dream, it works perfectly fine and has done so for David> 5+ years of Linux maintainence. It hasn't. The result is a system that works for you (and other active developers), but not for everyone. As an example -- try running Linux on a modern laptop, connecting some USB devices, using ACPI, or bluetooth. Observe the resulting problems and crashes. You'll hit loads of obscure bugs that have been reported, but never got looked at in detail. I certainly have hit them and reported most, and most got dropped in various places. Does this mean these are unimportant bugs? No. This does indeed mean (following your thinking) that these aren't important bugs for me. I have worked around them in various ways, some involving actually buying new hardware, or not using certain features at all. And the cycle will go on -- others will hit the bugs, report them once, see them dropped, move on. David> Let's see, what makes more sense from my perspective. Should I David> reward and put forth effort for the people who fart a bug report David> onto the lists and expect everyone to stop what they're doing David> and fix the bug, or should I reward and put forth effort for the David> guy who spent the time to put together a stellar bug report and David> also doesn't mind retransmitting it from time to time whilst David> everyone is busy? Interesting you should think you're 'rewarding' people. I thought your goal was to have fun working on cool software and making it better. I also thought I had the same goal as a bug-reporter. When I write software, I care about every bug report and consider people doing the reporting a very valuable resource. --J. [-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 188 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-07-12 17:07 ` Jan Rychter @ 2003-07-13 4:15 ` Greg KH 2003-07-14 20:25 ` USB bugs (was: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org) Jan Rychter 2003-07-13 5:22 ` networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org David S. Miller 1 sibling, 1 reply; 67+ messages in thread From: Greg KH @ 2003-07-13 4:15 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jan Rychter; +Cc: linux-kernel On Sat, Jul 12, 2003 at 10:07:42AM -0700, Jan Rychter wrote: > It hasn't. The result is a system that works for you (and other active > developers), but not for everyone. As an example -- try running Linux on > a modern laptop, connecting some USB devices, using ACPI, or > bluetooth. Observe the resulting problems and crashes. You'll hit loads > of obscure bugs that have been reported, but never got looked at in > detail. I certainly have hit them and reported most, and most got > dropped in various places. What USB bugs have you reported that have gotten dropped? Note, a _lot_ of USB bluetooth devices are real flaky, not much the kernel can do about them :( greg k-h ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: USB bugs (was: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org) 2003-07-13 4:15 ` Greg KH @ 2003-07-14 20:25 ` Jan Rychter [not found] ` <20030714230236.GA7195@kroah.com> 0 siblings, 1 reply; 67+ messages in thread From: Jan Rychter @ 2003-07-14 20:25 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-kernel [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1424 bytes --] >>>>> "Greg" == Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>: Greg> On Sat, Jul 12, 2003 at 10:07:42AM -0700, Jan Rychter wrote: >> It hasn't. The result is a system that works for you (and other >> active developers), but not for everyone. As an example -- try >> running Linux on a modern laptop, connecting some USB devices, using >> ACPI, or bluetooth. Observe the resulting problems and >> crashes. You'll hit loads of obscure bugs that have been reported, >> but never got looked at in detail. I certainly have hit them and >> reported most, and most got dropped in various places. Greg> What USB bugs have you reported that have gotten dropped? I'm sorry -- perhaps I shouldn't have said that. The USB bugs were actually the ones that did get attention. I overgeneralized, perhaps because I'm frustrated with the amount of problems that I get with Linux these days. I went ahead and retested all of my known USB problems against 2.4.22-pre5. It seems all usb-storage ones are gone, and there is only one bluetooth showstopper, fairly simple to reproduce: 1. boot the machine (using uhci) 2. insert a PCI BCM2033-based bluetooth adapter, observe the firmware getting loaded, don't actually bring the hci0 interface up, 3. remove the adapter, everything looks fine 4. try to rmmod uhci and get: kmem_cache_destroy: Can't free all objects c12c7b40 uhci: not all urb_priv's were freed --J. [-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 188 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <20030714230236.GA7195@kroah.com>]
* Re: USB bugs (was: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org) [not found] ` <20030714230236.GA7195@kroah.com> @ 2003-07-15 20:24 ` Jan Rychter 0 siblings, 0 replies; 67+ messages in thread From: Jan Rychter @ 2003-07-15 20:24 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Greg KH; +Cc: linux-kernel >>>>> "Greg" == Greg KH <greg@kroah.com> writes: Greg> On Mon, Jul 14, 2003 at 01:25:33PM -0700, Jan Rychter wrote: >> >> I went ahead and retested all of my known USB problems against >> 2.4.22-pre5. It seems all usb-storage ones are gone, and there is >> only one bluetooth showstopper, fairly simple to reproduce: >> >> 1. boot the machine (using uhci) >> 2. insert a PCI BCM2033-based bluetooth adapter, observe the >> firmware >> getting loaded, don't actually bring the hci0 interface up, >> 3. remove the adapter, everything looks fine >> 4. try to rmmod uhci and get: >> kmem_cache_destroy: Can't free all objects c12c7b40 uhci: not all >> urb_priv's were freed Greg> Is this reproducable on 2.6.0-test1? I can't reproduce this easily, as I haven't even tried 2.5.* kernels yet. Greg> Does this happen using the usb-uhci driver instead of the uhci Greg> driver? I'll check this and report. Greg> And this doesn't cause a failure, right? Just those messages in Greg> the log? It is a showstopper, because the resulting corruption (?) breaks software suspend. So, use bluetooth once, never suspend again. --J. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-07-12 17:07 ` Jan Rychter 2003-07-13 4:15 ` Greg KH @ 2003-07-13 5:22 ` David S. Miller 2003-07-13 5:42 ` Jan Rychter 1 sibling, 1 reply; 67+ messages in thread From: David S. Miller @ 2003-07-13 5:22 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jan Rychter; +Cc: linux-net, linux-kernel, netdev On Sat, 12 Jul 2003 10:07:42 -0700 Jan Rychter <jan@rychter.com> wrote: > Interesting you should think you're 'rewarding' people. I thought your > goal was to have fun working on cool software and making it > better. I also thought I had the same goal as a bug-reporter. > > When I write software, I care about every bug report and consider people > doing the reporting a very valuable resource. The whole game changes when you are stretched as thinly as I am. Scaling becomes everything, and nitpicking through vague and poorly composed bug reports is an absolute waste of my time as networking subsystem maintainer. If other people want to improve bug reports, put them into a cute usable database, and munge them along, that's fine with me. But _I_ only want to work with things that make the best use of my limited time. To be frank and honest, I do things that interest _ME_. And waddling through poorly made bug reports is anything but interesting, in fact it's frustrating work. I'd rather implement a software 802.11 stack or TCP Vegas implementation, THAT is what is a good use of my time because of my knowledge of how all these kinds of things work in the Linux networking. I can do things overnight that would take others weeks. Having me pillage through a bug database is a poor use of my time and capabilities. And all of my time is spent reviewing patches and dealing with the properly composed bug reports anyways, so even if I enjoyed pillaging through badly made bug reports I couldn't. People are assuming that just because _I_ don't want to work on the bad bug reports that I think nobody should. It's the exact opposite. I can't force other people to do or not do things anyways, just like everyone trying to somehow make it my "duty" to look at every single bug report cannot force me to do that. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-07-13 5:22 ` networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org David S. Miller @ 2003-07-13 5:42 ` Jan Rychter 0 siblings, 0 replies; 67+ messages in thread From: Jan Rychter @ 2003-07-13 5:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: David S. Miller; +Cc: linux-net, linux-kernel, netdev [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1591 bytes --] >>>>> "David" == David S Miller <davem@redhat.com> writes: David> On Sat, 12 Jul 2003 10:07:42 -0700 David> Jan Rychter <jan@rychter.com> wrote: >> Interesting you should think you're 'rewarding' people. I thought >> your goal was to have fun working on cool software and making it >> better. I also thought I had the same goal as a bug-reporter. >> >> When I write software, I care about every bug report and consider >> people doing the reporting a very valuable resource. David> The whole game changes when you are stretched as thinly as I am. David> Scaling becomes everything, and nitpicking through vague and David> poorly composed bug reports is an absolute waste of my time as David> networking subsystem maintainer. [...] Couldn't agree more. Especially after having benefited from your code so much (starting back in the early sparc days...). David> Having me pillage through a bug database is a poor use of my David> time and capabilities. And all of my time is spent reviewing David> patches and dealing with the properly composed bug reports David> anyways, so even if I enjoyed pillaging through badly made bug David> reports I couldn't. David> People are assuming that just because _I_ don't want to work on David> the bad bug reports that I think nobody should. It's the exact David> opposite. [...] Thanks for this explanation -- I responded because I was worried you were convincing people that it's a good thing if bug reports get dropped, because the really important ones will float to the top anyway. --J. [-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 188 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-27 21:37 ` David S. Miller 2003-06-27 21:54 ` Ben Greear @ 2003-06-27 22:02 ` Davide Libenzi 2003-06-27 21:31 ` Ben Collins 2003-06-27 22:02 ` David S. Miller 1 sibling, 2 replies; 67+ messages in thread From: Davide Libenzi @ 2003-06-27 22:02 UTC (permalink / raw) To: David S. Miller; +Cc: mbligh, Linux Kernel Mailing List, linux-net, netdev On Fri, 27 Jun 2003, David S. Miller wrote: > No, this is the _BAD_ part, shit accumulates equally with > useful reports. > > Useful reports in non-bugtracking system environments get > retransmitted and eventually looked at. David, your method is the dream of every software developer. Having Q/A repeatedly pushing the same issue. Having a track is good and flagging a report as not-a-bug or need-more-info takes almost the same time (if the system is sanely designed) it takes you to flag your message a shit. In this way though you do not lose things meaningful that you overlooked at first sight. And this comes from someone that wanted to quit his job when they forced for the first time to use a tracking system ;) - Davide ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-27 22:02 ` Davide Libenzi @ 2003-06-27 21:31 ` Ben Collins 2003-06-27 23:25 ` Andrew Morton 2003-06-27 22:02 ` David S. Miller 1 sibling, 1 reply; 67+ messages in thread From: Ben Collins @ 2003-06-27 21:31 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Davide Libenzi Cc: David S. Miller, mbligh, Linux Kernel Mailing List, linux-net, netdev On Fri, Jun 27, 2003 at 03:02:00PM -0700, Davide Libenzi wrote: > On Fri, 27 Jun 2003, David S. Miller wrote: > > > No, this is the _BAD_ part, shit accumulates equally with > > useful reports. > > > > Useful reports in non-bugtracking system environments get > > retransmitted and eventually looked at. > > David, your method is the dream of every software developer. Having Q/A > repeatedly pushing the same issue. Having a track is good and flagging a > report as not-a-bug or need-more-info takes almost the same time (if the > system is sanely designed) it takes you to flag your message a shit. In > this way though you do not lose things meaningful that you overlooked at > first sight. And this comes from someone that wanted to quit his job when > they forced for the first time to use a tracking system ;) As a bug reporter, and as someone who receives bug reports, I can say that on both ends I find it easier to send emails, and get emails than to fiddle with any bug tracking tool. I'm with Dave on this one. Scrap the nifty tools, and just use good sense. Emails let each developer handle bug reports in their own way. I'm sure you could make a nice local tool for yourself to manage your own bug reports. -- Debian - http://www.debian.org/ Linux 1394 - http://www.linux1394.org/ Subversion - http://subversion.tigris.org/ Deqo - http://www.deqo.com/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-27 21:31 ` Ben Collins @ 2003-06-27 23:25 ` Andrew Morton 2003-06-27 22:30 ` Ben Collins 2003-06-28 0:38 ` Martin J. Bligh 0 siblings, 2 replies; 67+ messages in thread From: Andrew Morton @ 2003-06-27 23:25 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ben Collins; +Cc: davidel, davem, mbligh, linux-kernel, linux-net, netdev Ben Collins <bcollins@debian.org> wrote: > > I'm with Dave on this one. I also. The bug database tries to convert the traditional many<->many debugging process into a one<->one process. This surely results in a lower cleanup rate. It's irritating replying to a bugzilla entry when you _know_ that you're cutting other interested parties out of the loop. And mailing lists tend to be self-correcting: - The once-off bugs due to broken hardware get filtered away. - The bugs which simply get magically fixed when someone repaired some unrelated part of the kernel get filtered out. - The bugs which are affecting people the most get reported the most. - Lots of other people can chip in with potentially useful info. It is nice to have a record. But bugzilla is not a comfortable or productive environment within which to drill down into and fix problems. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-27 23:25 ` Andrew Morton @ 2003-06-27 22:30 ` Ben Collins 2003-06-28 0:32 ` Larry McVoy 2003-06-28 0:38 ` Martin J. Bligh 1 sibling, 1 reply; 67+ messages in thread From: Ben Collins @ 2003-06-27 22:30 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrew Morton; +Cc: davidel, davem, mbligh, linux-kernel, linux-net, netdev > - The bugs which are affecting people the most get reported the most. Not to mention the "breeding" affect. A bug that many people have seen only once, but can never pinpoint because they can't reproduce it. One of those people reports the problem to the mailing list, and suddenly half a dozen respond with "me too, but here's some extra info that I saw". You can't get that with a bug database. -- Debian - http://www.debian.org/ Linux 1394 - http://www.linux1394.org/ Subversion - http://subversion.tigris.org/ Deqo - http://www.deqo.com/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-27 22:30 ` Ben Collins @ 2003-06-28 0:32 ` Larry McVoy 2003-06-28 19:26 ` Alan Cox 0 siblings, 1 reply; 67+ messages in thread From: Larry McVoy @ 2003-06-28 0:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ben Collins Cc: Andrew Morton, davidel, davem, mbligh, linux-kernel, linux-net, netdev On Fri, Jun 27, 2003 at 06:30:24PM -0400, Ben Collins wrote: > > - The bugs which are affecting people the most get reported the most. > > Not to mention the "breeding" affect. A bug that many people have seen > only once, but can never pinpoint because they can't reproduce it. One > of those people reports the problem to the mailing list, and suddenly > half a dozen respond with "me too, but here's some extra info that I > saw". You can't get that with a bug database. I can't believe that I'm dumb enough to ask this given the BK experience. We've built BugDB technology and we're quite interested in trying to make a system that works for engineers as well as managers. All that DB crud is great for managers who want metrics but engineers want an easy way to deal with the bugs. For example, an email interface. Our bugdb already has that, the emails include a URL so you can go look at that and do stuff to it but you can also reply to the email and do everything through the email interface. An NNTP interface is in the works. Is there any interest in having us mirror the bugzilla DB and work on making an interface that works for people with different needs? I had already assumed that I'd get hissed out of the room if I proposed this so feel free to say no if that's what you want. On the other hand, this one is maybe easier to swallow than BK because the interfaces are standard protocols (SMTP, HTTP, NNTP and maybe IMAP or POP some day) so you don't have to put your fingers on any evil BitMover software to get at it. If you do want us to look at this then I'd suggest that you elect someone to come up with a proposal that the community finds acceptable, i.e., if you use it then we have to do some stuff like - free access for everyone - data exported in CSV form so other people can get at it - ??? If you say you want it then we have to figure out some way that the community is happy up front. I'd suggest that Alan define the relationship, he has credibility, he doesn't like BK, he's smart enough to not get talked into something unreasonable, etc. -- --- Larry McVoy lm at bitmover.com http://www.bitmover.com/lm ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-28 0:32 ` Larry McVoy @ 2003-06-28 19:26 ` Alan Cox 0 siblings, 0 replies; 67+ messages in thread From: Alan Cox @ 2003-06-28 19:26 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Larry McVoy Cc: Ben Collins, Andrew Morton, davidel, davem, mbligh, Linux Kernel Mailing List, linux-net, netdev On Sad, 2003-06-28 at 01:32, Larry McVoy wrote: > Is there any interest in having us mirror the bugzilla DB and work on > making an interface that works for people with different needs? I had > already assumed that I'd get hissed out of the room if I proposed this > so feel free to say no if that's what you want. I already pull chunks of bugzilla data into plain text for processing, the more formats and tools the better. You can do a lot of great things with large sets of bugzilla data when you throw it at a text indexing engine for example. One of my todo list items is to learn enough emacs to play with feeding bugzilla data into the remembrance agent and seeing what happens ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-27 23:25 ` Andrew Morton 2003-06-27 22:30 ` Ben Collins @ 2003-06-28 0:38 ` Martin J. Bligh 2003-06-28 1:14 ` Andrew Morton 1 sibling, 1 reply; 67+ messages in thread From: Martin J. Bligh @ 2003-06-28 0:38 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrew Morton, Ben Collins Cc: davidel, davem, linux-kernel, linux-net, netdev > I also. The bug database tries to convert the traditional many<->many > debugging process into a one<->one process. This surely results in a > lower cleanup rate. I think your suggestion of sending new bugs out to LKML has made a big dent in the one<->one problem already. Replacing all the default owner fields with mailing lists (either existing ones or new ones) instead of individuals would be another step in that direction, though there may be a few hurdles to deal with on the way to that. Yes, we probably also need an "email back in" interface as we've discussed before to take it up to many-many. > It is nice to have a record. But bugzilla is not a comfortable or > productive environment within which to drill down into and fix problems. OK ... But I'd rather try to fix it than to throw the baby out with the bath water. I don't believe it's "unfixable" - the concept of tracking bugs / problems and making sure they're closed out still seems sound to me. As an example, I've seen several examples already where I've pestered people about bugs that already had patches attatched to them that resulted in "oh, yeah, I forgot to actually submit that", and it's got fixes back into mainline. I find it somewhat hard to believe that just about every other big project (including open source ones) uses some form of bug tracking system, and yet Linux is somehow magically different ;-) M. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-28 0:38 ` Martin J. Bligh @ 2003-06-28 1:14 ` Andrew Morton 2003-06-28 2:13 ` Martin J. Bligh 0 siblings, 1 reply; 67+ messages in thread From: Andrew Morton @ 2003-06-28 1:14 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Martin J. Bligh; +Cc: bcollins, davidel, davem, linux-kernel, linux-net, netdev "Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@aracnet.com> wrote: > > I think your suggestion of sending new bugs out to LKML has made a big > dent in the one<->one problem already. Replacing all the default owner > fields with mailing lists (either existing ones or new ones) instead of > individuals would be another step in that direction, though there may > be a few hurdles to deal with on the way to that. > > Yes, we probably also need an "email back in" interface as we've > discussed before to take it up to many-many. Both these things would help heaps - the tracking system then becomes invisible, basically. The best of both. Can we make it so? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-28 1:14 ` Andrew Morton @ 2003-06-28 2:13 ` Martin J. Bligh 2003-06-28 2:35 ` Andrew Morton 2003-06-28 3:27 ` Jamal Hadi 0 siblings, 2 replies; 67+ messages in thread From: Martin J. Bligh @ 2003-06-28 2:13 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrew Morton; +Cc: bcollins, davidel, davem, linux-kernel, linux-net, netdev --Andrew Morton <akpm@digeo.com> wrote (on Friday, June 27, 2003 18:14:32 -0700): > "Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@aracnet.com> wrote: >> >> I think your suggestion of sending new bugs out to LKML has made a big >> dent in the one<->one problem already. Replacing all the default owner >> fields with mailing lists (either existing ones or new ones) instead of >> individuals would be another step in that direction, though there may >> be a few hurdles to deal with on the way to that. >> >> Yes, we probably also need an "email back in" interface as we've >> discussed before to take it up to many-many. > > Both these things would help heaps - the tracking system then > becomes invisible, basically. The best of both. Can we make it so? The answer to both is yes, but one's harder than the other ;-) 1. default owners -> lists: Setting default owners to existing lists is somewhat invasive, and might provoke riots ;-) Not only do you get the new bug notification, but also any updates, which may become irritating. There's probably some vaguely happy medium to be found between: a) sending newly logged bugs to existing lists, b) sending updates to some new list. Maybe if we just create a new list for each category, and let people subscribe at will to those ... and I keep sending newly logged bugs to linux-kernel? I can cc netdev / linux-scsi / whatever on those new ones if that helps? That seems reasonably helpful and non-invasive to people who don't want to see it to me. People who like the mailing lists will see the new bug reports, and can just delete and forget them (as now). I'll go with the consensus of opinion (ha!) on this ... I'd like to make it useful without getting lynched ;-) Using new lists makes it less intrusive. Any way we go here is fairly easy to set up. 2. email back in. Email back in is harder, and needs more thought as to how to make it easy to use, whilst avoiding logging crap (eg. ensuing flamewars that derive from the bug reports, etc). My intuition is to log replies by default, and hack off certain threads by hand by keeping track of replies-to headers or something. Not desperately enamoured with that, but it's the best I can think of, off the top of my head. Open to other ideas ... Anyway, that bit is definitely a longer term project (ie not going to happen next week, but maybe in a few weeks). M. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-28 2:13 ` Martin J. Bligh @ 2003-06-28 2:35 ` Andrew Morton 2003-06-28 6:08 ` Martin J. Bligh 2003-06-28 3:27 ` Jamal Hadi 1 sibling, 1 reply; 67+ messages in thread From: Andrew Morton @ 2003-06-28 2:35 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Martin J. Bligh; +Cc: bcollins, davidel, davem, linux-kernel, linux-net, netdev "Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@aracnet.com> wrote: > > 1. default owners -> lists: > > Setting default owners to existing lists is somewhat invasive, and > might provoke riots ;-) Not only do you get the new bug notification, > but also any updates, which may become irritating. That's OK. It is a matter of people being aware that the updates will be echoed to a mailing list and acting appropriately. If some low-value stuff leaks through then ho-hum, at least it was on-topic. It is not as if we are unused to low-value content... It would be good if pure administrata such as changing the status were filtered. In fact, there is probably no point in sending anything bugzilla->list apart from the initial report. If the bug is then pursued via bugzilla then OK. If is is pursued via email then bugzilla just captures the discussion. > There's probably > some vaguely happy medium to be found between: > a) sending newly logged bugs to existing lists, > b) sending updates to some new list. > Maybe if we just create a new list for each category, and let > people subscribe at will to those ... and I keep sending newly logged > bugs to linux-kernel? I can cc netdev / linux-scsi / whatever on those > new ones if that helps? I think sending the initial report to the relevant lists and then capturing incoming email would suffice. > 2. email back in. > > Email back in is harder, and needs more thought as to how to make it > easy to use, whilst avoiding logging crap (eg. ensuing flamewars that > derive from the bug reports, etc). Well hopefully people will have the sense to cut the bugzilla address off the Cc line if it drifts off-topic. > My intuition is to log replies by > default, and hack off certain threads by hand Nah. Just log everything and hack off the crap by larting people. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-28 2:35 ` Andrew Morton @ 2003-06-28 6:08 ` Martin J. Bligh 0 siblings, 0 replies; 67+ messages in thread From: Martin J. Bligh @ 2003-06-28 6:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrew Morton; +Cc: bcollins, davidel, davem, linux-kernel, linux-net, netdev > If some low-value stuff leaks through then ho-hum, at least it was > on-topic. It is not as if we are unused to low-value content... ;-) > It would be good if pure administrata such as changing the status were > filtered. That should be easy enough. > In fact, there is probably no point in sending anything bugzilla->list apart > from the initial report. If the bug is then pursued via bugzilla then OK. > If is is pursued via email then bugzilla just captures the discussion. OK, but I'm pretty much doing that already. I try to filter out some of the "bugs with no content". So it sounds like the issue is more the loop from email back in. Will see what I can get done - have to schedule some time from the admins. >> 2. email back in. >> >> Email back in is harder, and needs more thought as to how to make it >> easy to use, whilst avoiding logging crap (eg. ensuing flamewars that >> derive from the bug reports, etc). > > Well hopefully people will have the sense to cut the bugzilla address off > the Cc line if it drifts off-topic. Fairy nuff. >> My intuition is to log replies by >> default, and hack off certain threads by hand > > Nah. Just log everything and hack off the crap by larting people. Heh. need to get a good "remote slap protocol" implemented. Perhaps the net guys can write us an RFC for it ;-) M. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-28 2:13 ` Martin J. Bligh 2003-06-28 2:35 ` Andrew Morton @ 2003-06-28 3:27 ` Jamal Hadi 1 sibling, 0 replies; 67+ messages in thread From: Jamal Hadi @ 2003-06-28 3:27 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Martin J. Bligh Cc: Andrew Morton, bcollins, davidel, davem, linux-kernel, linux-net, netdev I think what you need to ensure is a "push" operation with retransmits. Obvioulsy the "pull"ing of Dave to bugzilla hasnt worked (otherwise this discussion wouldnt be happening). Bug trackers have never worked for me either - in my current day job i am now passed notifications of every bugzuilla opened. I actually asked for this because i hate checking bugzilla. Over time heres what happened: month 0-3: Read the whole thing and called the owner. month 4-5: Spent about a 30 second glance and may email somebody month 6-9: Spend about 30 secs and archive them in a separate maibox month 9-12: fuck this shit. procmail the whole thing. That what procmail is for! Maybe someday over a fine cup of Tim Hortons French Vanilla cappucino and donut i'll go over that list and read them all- if only we had krispy creme donuts to go with Tim hortons coffee then i am sure i will read them ;-> The truth is i drink Tim Hortons capucino but still dont read the damn bugzilla mailbox. But i have it just in case i need it ... I can almost swear this is what will happen when you start ccing Dave on bugzillas. If you think of Dave as a server then the most reliable protocol is to retransmit. Under resource constraint he dumps packets (that del key). Add another server - Alexey - and broadcast to both via netdev and you start to scale. I dont think retransmission by a robot would work well either since it misses that human touch. So you have a challenging task. cheers, jamal ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-27 22:02 ` Davide Libenzi 2003-06-27 21:31 ` Ben Collins @ 2003-06-27 22:02 ` David S. Miller 2003-06-27 22:11 ` Davide Libenzi 1 sibling, 1 reply; 67+ messages in thread From: David S. Miller @ 2003-06-27 22:02 UTC (permalink / raw) To: davidel; +Cc: mbligh, linux-kernel, linux-net, netdev From: Davide Libenzi <davidel@xmailserver.org> Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 15:02:00 -0700 (PDT) David, your method is the dream of every software developer. It is not a dream, it works perfectly fine and has done so for 5+ years of Linux maintainence. To make these things scale you MUST push the work out to other people, you absolutely cannot centralize. And here we're pushing it out to the bug reporters, just like we push the work of patch maintainence to the patch submitters. If they don't care about the bug and won't retransmit when their stuff isn't being looked at, their bug isn't worth being looked at. I know that's a hard pill to swallow, but over years of work I can tell you this is the only scalable mechanism. Nobody likes this because it's not tracked somewhere and they can't show some pretty list of bugs to their management at the end of each week, TOO FUCKING BAD. Pay someone to work on your bugs if you want a pretty list and people being REQUIRED to look at and fix bugs. None of this crap is my problem. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-27 22:02 ` David S. Miller @ 2003-06-27 22:11 ` Davide Libenzi 2003-06-27 22:13 ` David S. Miller 0 siblings, 1 reply; 67+ messages in thread From: Davide Libenzi @ 2003-06-27 22:11 UTC (permalink / raw) To: David S. Miller; +Cc: mbligh, Linux Kernel Mailing List, linux-net, netdev On Fri, 27 Jun 2003, David S. Miller wrote: > From: Davide Libenzi <davidel@xmailserver.org> > Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 15:02:00 -0700 (PDT) > > David, your method is the dream of every software developer. > > It is not a dream, it works perfectly fine and has done so > for 5+ years of Linux maintainence. > > To make these things scale you MUST push the work out to other people, > you absolutely cannot centralize. And here we're pushing it out to > the bug reporters, just like we push the work of patch maintainence to > the patch submitters. > > If they don't care about the bug and won't retransmit when their > stuff isn't being looked at, their bug isn't worth being looked > at. David, I'm not willing to waste both precious time arguing on this but I will leave you question to think about. Is a bug report more useful for the user of a "system" or for the "system" itself ? - Davide ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-27 22:11 ` Davide Libenzi @ 2003-06-27 22:13 ` David S. Miller 0 siblings, 0 replies; 67+ messages in thread From: David S. Miller @ 2003-06-27 22:13 UTC (permalink / raw) To: davidel; +Cc: mbligh, linux-kernel, linux-net, netdev From: Davide Libenzi <davidel@xmailserver.org> Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 15:11:53 -0700 (PDT) Is a bug report more useful for the user of a "system" or for the "system" itself ? You can ask the same question about a patch, and my answer is the same, "it depends upon the bug/patch and whether the people it affects actually care about it". What's truly "useful" for the "system" are things that allow the people that maintain it to SCALE. Lossless bug and patch databases that force me to look at each and every item do not scale. What you don't understand is that I, and most of the people who help me, do this because I and they want to. So as soon as things get introduced that make us less "want" to do this you can be sure contributions will slump slowly but surely to nothing. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-27 5:47 ` David S. Miller 2003-06-27 7:59 ` Matti Aarnio 2003-06-27 14:34 ` Martin J. Bligh @ 2003-06-27 18:50 ` Ben Greear 2003-06-27 21:44 ` David S. Miller 2 siblings, 1 reply; 67+ messages in thread From: Ben Greear @ 2003-06-27 18:50 UTC (permalink / raw) To: David S. Miller; +Cc: mbligh, linux-kernel, linux-net, netdev David S. Miller wrote: > From: "Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@aracnet.com> > Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 22:46:10 -0700 > > If people choose to file bugs in bugzilla as well, they'll still be > processed by someone. > > Just so that someone can post them to the lists? > That sounds like a completely silly way to operate. > > I'd rather they get posted to the lists _ONLY_. I'm sure bugz could be set up to send a report to netdev everytime a bug was entered. And, we would also have a good record of bugs that people could search. It would also keep bugs from falling through the cracks: If 'everyone' is responsible, that can often mean that no one takes responsibility. Ben -- Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> <Ben_Greear AT excite.com> President of Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com ScryMUD: http://scry.wanfear.com http://scry.wanfear.com/~greear ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-27 18:50 ` Ben Greear @ 2003-06-27 21:44 ` David S. Miller 2003-06-27 22:47 ` Martin J. Bligh 2003-06-27 23:04 ` Alan Cox 0 siblings, 2 replies; 67+ messages in thread From: David S. Miller @ 2003-06-27 21:44 UTC (permalink / raw) To: greearb; +Cc: mbligh, linux-kernel, linux-net, netdev From: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 11:50:43 -0700 It would also keep bugs from falling through the cracks: People DON'T understand. I _WANT_ them to be able to fall through the cracks. If it's important, people will retransmit. This work for kernel patches, and has so for over 5 years. So what makes anyone thing it doesn't work for bug reporting? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-27 21:44 ` David S. Miller @ 2003-06-27 22:47 ` Martin J. Bligh 2003-06-27 22:53 ` Larry McVoy 2003-06-28 0:09 ` David S. Miller 2003-06-27 23:04 ` Alan Cox 1 sibling, 2 replies; 67+ messages in thread From: Martin J. Bligh @ 2003-06-27 22:47 UTC (permalink / raw) To: David S. Miller, greearb; +Cc: linux-kernel, linux-net, netdev --"David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com> wrote (on Friday, June 27, 2003 14:44:26 -0700): > From: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> > Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 11:50:43 -0700 > > It would also keep bugs from falling through the cracks: > > People DON'T understand. I _WANT_ them to be able to > fall through the cracks. I fail to see your point here. If that's what you want, then just don't look at the bugme data. However it's still available for other people that do want to see it. I can easily arrange for them to be transmitted when first filed by email, in fact we already do that. M. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-27 22:47 ` Martin J. Bligh @ 2003-06-27 22:53 ` Larry McVoy 2003-06-28 0:44 ` David S. Miller 2003-06-28 0:09 ` David S. Miller 1 sibling, 1 reply; 67+ messages in thread From: Larry McVoy @ 2003-06-27 22:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Martin J. Bligh; +Cc: David S. Miller, greearb, linux-kernel, linux-net, netdev On Fri, Jun 27, 2003 at 03:47:22PM -0700, Martin J. Bligh wrote: > --"David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com> wrote (on Friday, June 27, 2003 14:44:26 -0700): > > > From: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> > > Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 11:50:43 -0700 > > > > It would also keep bugs from falling through the cracks: > > > > People DON'T understand. I _WANT_ them to be able to > > fall through the cracks. > > I fail to see your point here. This might help. Or not. Brain dump on the bug tracking problem from the Kernel Summit discussions [SCCS/s.BUGS vers 1.3 2001/04/05 13:10:10] Outline Problems Problem details Past experiences Requirements Problems - getting quality bug reports - not losing any bugs - sorting low signal vs high signal into a smaller high signal pile - simplified, preferably NNTP, access to the bug database (Linus would use this; he's unlikely to use anything else) Problem details Bug report quality There was lots of discussion on this. The main agreement was that we wanted the bug reporting system to dig out as much info as possible and prefill that. There was a lot of discussion about possible tools that would dig out the /proc/pci info; there was discussion about Andre's tools which can tell you if you can write your disk; someone else had something similar. But the main thing was to extract all the info we could automatically. One thing was the machine config (hardware and at least kernel version). The other thing was extract any oops messages and get a stack traceback. The other main thing was to define some sort of structure to the bug report and try and get the use to categorize if they could. In an ideal world, we would use the maintainers file and the stack traceback to cc the bug to the maintainer. I think we want to explore this a bit. I'm not sure that the maintainer file is the way to go, what if we divided it up into much broader chunks like "fs", "vm", "network drivers", and had a mail forwarder for each area. That could fan out to the maintainers. Not losing bugs While there was much discussion about how to get rid of bad, incorrect, and/or duplicate bug reports, several people - Alan in particular - made the point that having a complete collection of all bug reports was important. You can do data mining across all/part of them and look for patterns. The point was that there is some useful signal amongst all the noise so we do not want to lose that signal. Signal/noise We had a lot of discussion about how to deal with signal/noise. The bugzilla proponents thought we could do this with some additional hacking to bugzilla. I, given the BitKeeper background, thought that we could do this by having two databases, one with all the crud in it and another with just the screened bugs in it. No matter how it is done, there needs to be some way to both keep a full list, which will likely be used only for data mining, and another, much smaller list of screened bugs. Jens wants there to be a queue of new bugs and a mechanism where people can come in the morning, pull a pile of bugs off of the queue, sort them, sending some to the real database. This idea has a lot of merit, it needs some pondering as DaveM would say, to get to the point that we have a workable mechanism which works in a distributed fashion. The other key point seemed to be that if nobody picked up a bug and nobody said that this bug should be picked up, then the bug expires out of the pending queue. It gets stashed in the bug archive for mining purposes and it can be resurrected if it later becomes a real bug, but the key point seems to be that it _automatically_ disappears out of the pending queue. I personally am very supportive of this model. We need some way to just let junk stay junk. If junk has to be pruned out of the system by humans, the system sucks. The system, not humans, needs to autoprune. Simplified access: browsing and updating Linus made the point that mailing lists suck. He isn't on any and refuses to join any. He reads lists with a news reader. I think people should sit up and listen to that - it's a key point. If your mailing list isn't gatewayed to a newsgroup, he isn't reading it and a lot of other people aren't either. There was a fair bit of discussion about how to get the bug database connected to news. There doesn't seem to be any reason that the bug system couldn't be a news server/gateway. You should be able to browse bitbucket.kernel.bugs - all the unscreened crud screened.kernel.bugs - all bugs which have been screened fs.kernel.bugs - screened bugs in the "fs" category ext2.kernel.bugs - screened bugs in the "ext2" category eepro.kernel.bugs - screened bugs in the "eepro" category etc. Furthermore, the bugs should be structured once they are screened, i.e., they have a set of fields like (this is a strawman): Synopsis - one line man-page like summary of the bug Severity - how critical is this bug? Priority - how soon does it need to be fixed? Category - subsystem in which the bug occurs Description - details on the bug, oops, stack trace, etc. Hardware - hardware info Software - kernel version, glibc version, etc. Suggested fix - any suggestion on how to fix it Interest list - set of email addresses and/or newsgroups for updates It ought to work that if someone posts a followup to the bug then if the followup changes any of the fields that gets propagated to the underlying bug database. If this is done properly the news reader will be the only interface that most people use. Past experiences This is a catch all for sound bytes that we don't want to forget... - Sorting bugs by hand is a pain in the ass (Ted burned out on it and Alan refuses to say that it is the joy of his life to do it) - bug systems tend to "get in the way". Unless they are really trivial to submit, search, update then people get tired of using them and go back to the old way - one key observation: let bugs "expire" much like news expires. If nobody has been whining enough that it gets into the high signal bug db then it probably isn't real. We really want a way where no activity means let it expire. - Alan pointed out that having all of the bugs someplace is useful, you can search through the 200 similar bugs and notice that SMP is the common feature. Requirements This section is mostly empty, it's here as a catch all for people's bullet items. - it would be very nice to be able to cross reference bugs to bug fixes in the source management system, as well as the other way around. - mail based interface -- --- Larry McVoy lm at bitmover.com http://www.bitmover.com/lm ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-27 22:53 ` Larry McVoy @ 2003-06-28 0:44 ` David S. Miller 0 siblings, 0 replies; 67+ messages in thread From: David S. Miller @ 2003-06-28 0:44 UTC (permalink / raw) To: lm; +Cc: mbligh, greearb, linux-kernel, linux-net, netdev From: Larry McVoy <lm@bitmover.com> Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 15:53:05 -0700 - one key observation: let bugs "expire" much like news expires. If nobody has been whining enough that it gets into the high signal bug db then it probably isn't real. We really want a way where no activity means let it expire. I want more than time based expiry, I want expiry for me that is controlled by me. When I delete the notification email in my mailbox, I never want to see that bug again unless I want to. This effectively degrades into list posting based bug reports and my current email inbox, which is what I'm advocating to use :-) When I see the "me too, heres some more info" response to the list posting, then I'm interested and I'll reread the list thread to digest all the information to see what I can make of it. When this happens bugs basically fix themselves, and this occurs only because of the acts taken on by the reporters of the bug not me. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-27 22:47 ` Martin J. Bligh 2003-06-27 22:53 ` Larry McVoy @ 2003-06-28 0:09 ` David S. Miller 1 sibling, 0 replies; 67+ messages in thread From: David S. Miller @ 2003-06-28 0:09 UTC (permalink / raw) To: mbligh; +Cc: greearb, linux-kernel, linux-net, netdev From: "Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@aracnet.com> Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 15:47:22 -0700 --"David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com> wrote (on Friday, June 27, 2003 14:44:26 -0700): > People DON'T understand. I _WANT_ them to be able to > fall through the cracks. I fail to see your point here. If that's what you want, then just don't look at the bugme data. bugme bugs persist, when I delete an email it doesn't get deleted from the bugme database (at least when I go and view it). Let me draw a diagram for you, say we have 3 contributors A B and C. They watch the mailing lists, analyze bugs, and work on new features. They work on what they want to, by the very nature of open-source development. When a bug hits a mailing list the following might happen: A is overloaded, he deletes the email. B has a look, realizes he is not competent in this area and deletes the email. C analayzes and fixes the bug. I want A and B to have never again have to deal with this bug report. There is zero point in having the capability to "delete" the email if it persists in some database somewhere, it's not deleted it's still in the backlog. If nobody need fear their report get deleted by overload on the developers, nobody need do anything but be lazy. And that system does not work, the contribution must be mutual for this system to work. This means that when developers are overloaded they can delete your report and you'll resend it later. I don't understand why people have no problem understanding that this system works when it is in the context of lossy networking protocols (IPV4) and the things that sit on top to ensure reliable data delivery via retransmit (TCP), but when this idea is proposed for things involving people and software development they fall to fear and doubt. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-27 21:44 ` David S. Miller 2003-06-27 22:47 ` Martin J. Bligh @ 2003-06-27 23:04 ` Alan Cox 2003-06-28 0:19 ` David S. Miller 2003-06-29 21:15 ` David S. Miller 1 sibling, 2 replies; 67+ messages in thread From: Alan Cox @ 2003-06-27 23:04 UTC (permalink / raw) To: David S. Miller Cc: greearb, mbligh, Linux Kernel Mailing List, linux-net, netdev On Gwe, 2003-06-27 at 22:44, David S. Miller wrote: > This work for kernel patches, and has so for over 5 years. > So what makes anyone thing it doesn't work for bug reporting? It works badly for kernel patches, stuff does get lost forever, missed etc. Having it all archived somewhere is really valuable because it means you can spot patterns, trends and also when someone who isnt a hacker hits the bug *they* can find the patch you missed and send it on or remind you You are assuming there is a relationship in bug severity/commonness and number of *developers* who hit it. That isnt true, developer and end user hardware patterns are radically different in some areas ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-27 23:04 ` Alan Cox @ 2003-06-28 0:19 ` David S. Miller 2003-06-29 21:15 ` David S. Miller 1 sibling, 0 replies; 67+ messages in thread From: David S. Miller @ 2003-06-28 0:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: alan; +Cc: greearb, mbligh, linux-kernel, linux-net, netdev From: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> Date: 28 Jun 2003 00:04:30 +0100 it means you can spot patterns, trends I already spot patterns and trends when people retransmit the bug/patch/whatever. As do other people. Frankly, people who aren't willing to maintain their patches and retransmit them to me, do not matter as far as I am concerned. If you don't want to put forth the effort, I do not want to interact with you. I feel the same way about bugs. Linus has been saying this and doing it for years, and I've had to learn the hard way that he's absolutely right in this regard. If you try to track everything, you accomplish nothing. You will, however, get overloaded and frustrated. To scale one must reserve the right to hit the delete key and it's _GONE_ not accumulating somewhere else. We need social engineering. If someone never gets their bug looked at because they post absolute crap bug reports, that's a feature. If people spend all this effort making sense of such reports and fix them _ANYWAYS_ the reporter will never learn to produce high quality bug reports that are more useful to us. That means the scarcest resource we have is being used inefficiently. That same goes for patches, and I've watched over time how this works. This is another reasone that I hate when people privately email me stuff, because I _WILL_ delete it and I _WILL_ lose it. If you post it to the lists, it gets accumulated somewhere but it doesn't clog my mailbox and it doesn't create a backlog for me. It also means that if I'm sipping Mai Tai's in Hawaii other people will see and can react to the report. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-27 23:04 ` Alan Cox 2003-06-28 0:19 ` David S. Miller @ 2003-06-29 21:15 ` David S. Miller 2003-06-29 21:45 ` Andries Brouwer 2003-06-29 22:07 ` Alan Cox 1 sibling, 2 replies; 67+ messages in thread From: David S. Miller @ 2003-06-29 21:15 UTC (permalink / raw) To: alan; +Cc: greearb, mbligh, linux-kernel, linux-net, netdev From: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> Date: 28 Jun 2003 00:04:30 +0100 You are assuming there is a relationship in bug severity/commonness and number of *developers* who hit it. Not true, the assumption I make is that a bug report that a bug reporter cares about, and a patch that a patch submitter cares about, will all get resent if they get dropped. If the reporter/submitter doesn't care, neither do I. You keep saying that lost information is bad and serves no positive purpose, and I totally disagree. Drops are litmus tests for the patch/report, they also serve to educate the submitters. And to repeat, this process is a two way street Alan. If you try to make it anything else, you will wear yourself thin. Once you enforce the work to be distributed to the people who report to you as much as to the people taking the reports, thing will go much more smoothly. :-) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-29 21:15 ` David S. Miller @ 2003-06-29 21:45 ` Andries Brouwer 2003-06-29 21:51 ` David S. Miller 2003-06-29 22:07 ` Alan Cox 1 sibling, 1 reply; 67+ messages in thread From: Andries Brouwer @ 2003-06-29 21:45 UTC (permalink / raw) To: David S. Miller; +Cc: alan, greearb, mbligh, linux-kernel, linux-net, netdev On Sun, Jun 29, 2003 at 02:15:28PM -0700, David S. Miller wrote: > From: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> > Date: 28 Jun 2003 00:04:30 +0100 > > You are assuming there is a relationship in bug severity/commonness > and number of *developers* who hit it. > > Not true, the assumption I make is that a bug report that > a bug reporter cares about, and a patch that a patch submitter > cares about, will all get resent if they get dropped. > > If the reporter/submitter doesn't care, neither do I. You are right, but only in the part where you say that this is the best, indeed the only, way you can work. Alan is right, information is important, and a lot of it is submitted only once. (And a lot of it is submitted three times and ignored three times.) Suppose you find a gcc bug, construct a small example that is mistranslated and send it off to the gcc list. Maybe even include a fix. Will you babysit them, check whether later snapshots correct this flaw, resubmit your report every month if not? Maybe you will. I certainly don't - send the report and that's it. Andries ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-29 21:45 ` Andries Brouwer @ 2003-06-29 21:51 ` David S. Miller 2003-06-29 22:49 ` Andries Brouwer 0 siblings, 1 reply; 67+ messages in thread From: David S. Miller @ 2003-06-29 21:51 UTC (permalink / raw) To: aebr; +Cc: alan, greearb, mbligh, linux-kernel, linux-net, netdev From: Andries Brouwer <aebr@win.tue.nl> Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2003 23:45:58 +0200 Will you babysit them, check whether later snapshots correct this flaw, resubmit your report every month if not? Maybe you will. I certainly don't - send the report and that's it. And like evolution and many other processes in life, the things that put forth the effort will tend to get further and accomplish more. As a result, your bug reports will tend to not be tended to, whilst those of the persistent people will. People who care about their bug reports learn the become persistent or accept that their bugs tend to not get looked at. People who expect that, for free, one bug submission will get their bug fixed and this is somehow ensured are truly living in a dream world. Let's see, what makes more sense from my perspective. Should I reward and put forth effort for the people who fart a bug report onto the lists and expect everyone to stop what they're doing and fix the bug, or should I reward and put forth effort for the guy who spent the time to put together a stellar bug report and also doesn't mind retransmitting it from time to time whilst everyone is busy? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-29 21:51 ` David S. Miller @ 2003-06-29 22:49 ` Andries Brouwer 2003-06-29 23:21 ` Davide Libenzi 0 siblings, 1 reply; 67+ messages in thread From: Andries Brouwer @ 2003-06-29 22:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: David S. Miller; +Cc: alan, greearb, mbligh, linux-kernel, linux-net, netdev On Sun, Jun 29, 2003 at 02:51:14PM -0700, David S. Miller wrote: > From: Andries Brouwer <aebr@win.tue.nl> > Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2003 23:45:58 +0200 > > Will you babysit them, check whether later snapshots correct this > flaw, resubmit your report every month if not? Maybe you will. I > certainly don't - send the report and that's it. > > As a result, your bug reports will tend to not be tended to, Maybe that is the wrong answer. It seems they have a bug tracking system. > People who expect that, for free, one bug submission will get > their bug fixed See, you think you are doing the submitter a favour. I prefer the point of view that the submitter does us a favour. Something is wrong, and people work around it. But they tell us about it. If we want we can try to fix. Or we can store the information for later examination. Very often it is needed later - fortunately Google helps. A more focused data base might help even better. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-29 22:49 ` Andries Brouwer @ 2003-06-29 23:21 ` Davide Libenzi 0 siblings, 0 replies; 67+ messages in thread From: Davide Libenzi @ 2003-06-29 23:21 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andries Brouwer Cc: David S. Miller, Alan Cox, greearb, mbligh, Linux Kernel Mailing List, linux-net, netdev On Mon, 30 Jun 2003, Andries Brouwer wrote: > See, you think you are doing the submitter a favour. > I prefer the point of view that the submitter does us a favour. You the winner ! You answered correctly to my previous question ;) - Davide ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-29 21:15 ` David S. Miller 2003-06-29 21:45 ` Andries Brouwer @ 2003-06-29 22:07 ` Alan Cox 2003-06-29 22:13 ` David S. Miller 1 sibling, 1 reply; 67+ messages in thread From: Alan Cox @ 2003-06-29 22:07 UTC (permalink / raw) To: David S. Miller Cc: greearb, mbligh, Linux Kernel Mailing List, linux-net, netdev On Sul, 2003-06-29 at 22:15, David S. Miller wrote: > You keep saying that lost information is bad and serves no > positive purpose, and I totally disagree. Drops are litmus tests > for the patch/report, they also serve to educate the submitters. What you don't get is that like you I'm distributing work. I'm getting end users to spot bug correlations - and thats why I want better tools Report bug should get Your bug looks like #1131 #4151 or #11719 (Resolved), please check ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-29 22:07 ` Alan Cox @ 2003-06-29 22:13 ` David S. Miller 2003-06-30 2:35 ` Martin J. Bligh 0 siblings, 1 reply; 67+ messages in thread From: David S. Miller @ 2003-06-29 22:13 UTC (permalink / raw) To: alan; +Cc: greearb, mbligh, linux-kernel, linux-net, netdev From: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> Date: 29 Jun 2003 23:07:07 +0100 What you don't get is that like you I'm distributing work. I'm getting end users to spot bug correlations - and thats why I want better tools I understand this part, it's great sounding in theory. But all the examples I've seen are you sifting through bugzilla making these correlations. I've seen no evidence of community participation in this activity. The greatest tools in the world aren't useful if people don't want to use them. Nobody wants to use tools unless it melds easily into their existing daily routine. This means it must be email based and it must somehow work via the existing mailing lists. It sounds a lot like what I'm advocating except that there's some robot monitoring the list postings. But then who monitors and maintains the entries? That's the big problem and I haven't heard a good solution yet. Going to a web site and clicking buttons is not a solution. That's a waste of time. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-29 22:13 ` David S. Miller @ 2003-06-30 2:35 ` Martin J. Bligh 2003-07-20 16:46 ` Petr Baudis 0 siblings, 1 reply; 67+ messages in thread From: Martin J. Bligh @ 2003-06-30 2:35 UTC (permalink / raw) To: David S. Miller, alan; +Cc: greearb, linux-kernel, linux-net, netdev --"David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com> wrote (on Sunday, June 29, 2003 15:13:02 -0700): > From: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> > Date: 29 Jun 2003 23:07:07 +0100 > > What you don't get is that like you I'm distributing work. I'm > getting end users to spot bug correlations - and thats why I want > better tools > > DaveM: > I understand this part, it's great sounding in theory. > > But all the examples I've seen are you sifting through bugzilla making > these correlations. I've seen no evidence of community participation > in this activity. People have been. Maybe not with the networking bugs, but I've seen people sift through other stuff, and mark off duplicates, and point out similarities. People go chase attatched patches back into the tree, and people test fixes they didn't submit the bug for, and report status. I'd like more of that, but it happens already. > The greatest tools in the world aren't useful if people don't want > to use them. > > Nobody wants to use tools unless it melds easily into their existing > daily routine. This means it must be email based and it must somehow > work via the existing mailing lists. It sounds a lot like what I'm > advocating except that there's some robot monitoring the list > postings. Agreed, the interface could be better - we're working on it. It won't be totally change free, but it could be better integrated. Feedback is very useful, though it helps a lot of you can pinpoint what's the underlying issue rather than "this is crap". Better email integration is top of the list, starting with sending stuff out to multiple people when filed, not a single bottleneck point. > But then who monitors and maintains the entries? That's the big > problem and I haven't heard a good solution yet. Going to a web site > and clicking buttons is not a solution. That's a waste of time. There is an army of elves out there, quite capable and willing. Like most change, it takes a little time, but it's started already. > AEB: > > See, you think you are doing the submitter a favour. > I prefer the point of view that the submitter does us a favour. Absolutely. Personally, I think testing & communication with users is more what we're lacking as a community than coding power. In Dave's case, it sounds like he's so swamped, it's not an issue for him. However, finding and fixing stuff earlier on will actually reduce the workload, IMHO. It's a damned sight easier to find a bug you wrote yesterday than one you wrote last year. I *love* things like nightly regression testing that reaches out and larts me with a bug report in < 24 hrs of me screwing things up. Lastly, I'd rather ditch bug reports based on crap content, or overall impact, than whether I happened to be busy at the moment they came in. M. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org 2003-06-30 2:35 ` Martin J. Bligh @ 2003-07-20 16:46 ` Petr Baudis 0 siblings, 0 replies; 67+ messages in thread From: Petr Baudis @ 2003-07-20 16:46 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Martin J. Bligh Cc: David S. Miller, alan, greearb, linux-kernel, linux-net, netdev Dear diary, on Mon, Jun 30, 2003 at 04:35:44AM CEST, I got a letter, where "Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@aracnet.com> told me, that... > --"David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com> wrote (on Sunday, June 29, 2003 15:13:02 -0700): ..snip.. > > The greatest tools in the world aren't useful if people don't want > > to use them. > > > > Nobody wants to use tools unless it melds easily into their existing > > daily routine. This means it must be email based and it must somehow > > work via the existing mailing lists. It sounds a lot like what I'm > > advocating except that there's some robot monitoring the list > > postings. > > Agreed, the interface could be better - we're working on it. It won't > be totally change free, but it could be better integrated. Feedback is > very useful, though it helps a lot of you can pinpoint what's the > underlying issue rather than "this is crap". Better email integration > is top of the list, starting with sending stuff out to multiple people > when filed, not a single bottleneck point. Actually, it's not difficult to make Bugzilla to do things like sending out ALL bugs updates emails to certain email adress(es), on a global basis or per-module. Also, it is relatively easy to make Bugzilla _accept_ bugs updates through email, from additional comments (+ attachments) to status/priority/target/... changes. It works quite nicely for us (ELinks) and it took just few hours to set up properly (we had to touch the BZ sources, but just a little, the rest are external support scripts). What is missing is some email interface for querying the database (shouldn't be difficult to do, though), but if you just want to file/update bugs, all you need is to: * have the new bugs posted on the mailing list * keep bugzilla in the cc list through the whole thread, as long as it's relevant at least ;-) * don't remove [Bug 12345] from the subject If Martin would like some know-how about how to set things up, I could share what we've done with him. Kind regards, -- Petr "Pasky" Baudis . Perfection is reached, not when there is no longer anything to add, but when there is no longer anything to take away. -- Antoine de Saint-Exupery . Stuff: http://pasky.ji.cz/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 67+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2003-07-20 16:31 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 67+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2003-06-27 5:30 networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org David S. Miller 2003-06-27 5:46 ` Martin J. Bligh 2003-06-27 5:47 ` David S. Miller 2003-06-27 7:59 ` Matti Aarnio 2003-06-27 8:00 ` David S. Miller 2003-06-27 15:00 ` Martin J. Bligh 2003-06-27 14:34 ` Martin J. Bligh 2003-06-27 14:56 ` Davide Libenzi 2003-06-27 21:37 ` David S. Miller 2003-06-27 21:54 ` Ben Greear 2003-06-27 21:54 ` David S. Miller 2003-06-27 22:15 ` Ben Greear 2003-06-27 22:19 ` David S. Miller 2003-06-27 22:36 ` Ben Greear 2003-06-28 0:00 ` David S. Miller 2003-06-28 0:15 ` Martin J. Bligh 2003-06-28 0:32 ` David S. Miller 2003-06-28 0:19 ` Larry McVoy 2003-06-28 0:27 ` Martin J. Bligh 2003-06-28 19:20 ` Alan Cox 2003-06-29 0:40 ` Daniel Jacobowitz 2003-06-29 0:44 ` Martin J. Bligh 2003-06-27 23:08 ` Alan Cox 2003-06-28 0:21 ` David S. Miller 2003-06-28 19:19 ` Alan Cox 2003-06-28 22:03 ` David S. Miller 2003-06-28 23:15 ` Alan Cox 2003-06-28 23:20 ` David S. Miller 2003-06-28 23:46 ` Alan Cox 2003-07-12 17:07 ` Jan Rychter 2003-07-13 4:15 ` Greg KH 2003-07-14 20:25 ` USB bugs (was: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org) Jan Rychter [not found] ` <20030714230236.GA7195@kroah.com> 2003-07-15 20:24 ` Jan Rychter 2003-07-13 5:22 ` networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org David S. Miller 2003-07-13 5:42 ` Jan Rychter 2003-06-27 22:02 ` Davide Libenzi 2003-06-27 21:31 ` Ben Collins 2003-06-27 23:25 ` Andrew Morton 2003-06-27 22:30 ` Ben Collins 2003-06-28 0:32 ` Larry McVoy 2003-06-28 19:26 ` Alan Cox 2003-06-28 0:38 ` Martin J. Bligh 2003-06-28 1:14 ` Andrew Morton 2003-06-28 2:13 ` Martin J. Bligh 2003-06-28 2:35 ` Andrew Morton 2003-06-28 6:08 ` Martin J. Bligh 2003-06-28 3:27 ` Jamal Hadi 2003-06-27 22:02 ` David S. Miller 2003-06-27 22:11 ` Davide Libenzi 2003-06-27 22:13 ` David S. Miller 2003-06-27 18:50 ` Ben Greear 2003-06-27 21:44 ` David S. Miller 2003-06-27 22:47 ` Martin J. Bligh 2003-06-27 22:53 ` Larry McVoy 2003-06-28 0:44 ` David S. Miller 2003-06-28 0:09 ` David S. Miller 2003-06-27 23:04 ` Alan Cox 2003-06-28 0:19 ` David S. Miller 2003-06-29 21:15 ` David S. Miller 2003-06-29 21:45 ` Andries Brouwer 2003-06-29 21:51 ` David S. Miller 2003-06-29 22:49 ` Andries Brouwer 2003-06-29 23:21 ` Davide Libenzi 2003-06-29 22:07 ` Alan Cox 2003-06-29 22:13 ` David S. Miller 2003-06-30 2:35 ` Martin J. Bligh 2003-07-20 16:46 ` Petr Baudis
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).