From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <tiwai@suse.de>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
	[172.17.192.35])
	by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 64E76A55
	for <ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Thu, 22 Jun 2017 14:24:03 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mx1.suse.de (mx2.suse.de [195.135.220.15])
	by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E4B5518F
	for <ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Thu, 22 Jun 2017 14:24:02 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 16:24:00 +0200
Message-ID: <s5h7f04qewv.wl-tiwai@suse.de>
From: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de>
To: Jiri Kosina <jikos@kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LSU.2.20.1706221610000.30709@cbobk.fhfr.pm>
References: <1de3c642-a4b7-1065-5c35-ba32866d471d@redhat.com>
	<s5h8tkkqfn6.wl-tiwai@suse.de>
	<alpine.LSU.2.20.1706221610000.30709@cbobk.fhfr.pm>
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Cc: ksummit <ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] Bug reporting feedback
	loop
List-Id: <ksummit-discuss.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/ksummit-discuss>,
	<mailto:ksummit-discuss-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/ksummit-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ksummit-discuss-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ksummit-discuss>,
	<mailto:ksummit-discuss-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>

On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 16:12:09 +0200,
Jiri Kosina wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 22 Jun 2017, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> 
> > - The inconsistent bug tracking over the whole kernel areas:
> >   which way to report purely depends on the subsystem.  Even inside a
> >   subsystem, some prefer bugzilla while some don't.
> 
> Agreed that this might be annoying for the reporters, but I don't think we 
> want to go towards pushing maintainers to use one unified solution. That'd 
> be counter-productive.

I don't pursue that, either.  It'd be great, though, if we can reduce
the too much differences.  The variety is the strength of open source,
but in this case...

> > It would be great to have someone assigned helping for bug tracking in 
> > both upstream (kernel subsystem) side, and in distributor side. We have 
> > a better coordination regarding the security bugs, and it should be 
> > extended for larger areas.
> 
> Completely agreed. But given the problems we've had finding someone who'd 
> be tracking regressions (which is a small subset of the whole "bug 
> handling"), I'm a bit skeptical.

Yeah, I'm also not optimistic about this.  But we need to change our
mind set at first, taking the bug handling more seriously, trying to
put more resources there.


thanks,

Takashi