http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26630
Summary: Please add an 'upstream' resolution Product: WineHQ Bugzilla Version: unspecified Platform: x86 OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P2 Component: bugzilla-unknown AssignedTo: wine-bugs@winehq.org ReportedBy: austinenglish@gmail.com
There have been a few different bugs reported in wine's bugzilla that ended up being bugs upstream, either in the Linux kernel, AMD/Nvidia/Mesa drivers, in Mono, etc. It would be nice to know that the bug is fixed upstream, rather than marked as invalid like we're doing now.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26630
--- Comment #1 from Dmitry Timoshkov dmitry@codeweavers.com 2011-04-01 22:07:07 CDT --- There is already one - INVALID, which translates to Not a Wine bug.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26630
Jerome Leclanche adys.wh@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |adys.wh@gmail.com
--- Comment #2 from Jerome Leclanche adys.wh@gmail.com 2011-04-02 05:34:52 CDT --- (In reply to comment #1)
There is already one - INVALID, which translates to Not a Wine bug.
The idea I think is to have an UPSTREAM one to differenciate from invalid bugs that *are* actually invalid. Upstream bugs are still valid.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26630
--- Comment #3 from Dmitry Timoshkov dmitry@codeweavers.com 2011-04-03 01:52:15 CDT --- (In reply to comment #2)
There is already one - INVALID, which translates to Not a Wine bug.
The idea I think is to have an UPSTREAM one to differenciate from invalid bugs that *are* actually invalid. Upstream bugs are still valid.
The product is 'Wine', only bugs for the product should be considered as valid IMHO. What's wrong with adding something like '(NVidia driver bug)', 'Linux kernel bug' in the subject when closing a bug as invalid when appropriate? This doesn't even deserve a keyword IMO.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26630
--- Comment #4 from Austin English austinenglish@gmail.com 2011-04-03 17:40:18 CDT --- (In reply to comment #3)
(In reply to comment #2)
There is already one - INVALID, which translates to Not a Wine bug.
The idea I think is to have an UPSTREAM one to differenciate from invalid bugs that *are* actually invalid. Upstream bugs are still valid.
The product is 'Wine', only bugs for the product should be considered as valid IMHO. What's wrong with adding something like '(NVidia driver bug)', 'Linux kernel bug' in the subject when closing a bug as invalid when appropriate? This doesn't even deserve a keyword IMO.
The bugs are not valid wine bugs, but should be distinguished from truly invalid bugs. Yes, we could put it in the title, but that makes searching for them a bit harder.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26630
--- Comment #5 from Dmitry Timoshkov dmitry@codeweavers.com 2011-04-03 23:12:34 CDT --- (In reply to comment #4)
The bugs are not valid wine bugs, but should be distinguished from truly invalid bugs. Yes, we could put it in the title, but that makes searching for them a bit harder.
Adding (Not a Wine bug) is another solution.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26630
--- Comment #6 from Jerome Leclanche adys.wh@gmail.com 2011-04-03 23:20:09 CDT --- (In reply to comment #5)
(In reply to comment #4)
The bugs are not valid wine bugs, but should be distinguished from truly invalid bugs. Yes, we could put it in the title, but that makes searching for them a bit harder.
Adding (Not a Wine bug) is another solution.
I think a keyword is the simplest solution. "upstream" or "notwine" or something like that.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26630
André H. nerv@dawncrow.de changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |nerv@dawncrow.de
--- Comment #7 from André H. nerv@dawncrow.de 2012-03-03 06:46:11 CST --- Updates on this?
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26630
--- Comment #8 from Rosanne DiMesio dimesio@earthlink.net 2012-03-03 12:30:54 CST --- FWIW, I try to keep track of upstream bugs that affect our users so I know what to tell them when they ask for help, and it's much easier for me if they are also tracked here. Adding "Not a Wine bug" to the summary does work for that in a kludgy sort of way while the bug is still open, but resolving them as invalid isn't accurate; they are valid, just not ours. And from a PR perspective, I think an official "upstream" resolution looks more professional/official to users than someone just tacking on "Not a Wine bug" to the summary.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26630
--- Comment #9 from Dmitry Timoshkov dmitry@baikal.ru 2012-03-04 01:18:25 CST --- Adding an url to an external bugilla in the "See Also:" field may be more desirable than the new resolution status. 'Invalid' clearly means that it's not a Wine bug. It's not practical to try distinguish whether it's a user error, file system corruption, a compiler bug, a bug in some external package, or something else.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26630
--- Comment #10 from Rosanne DiMesio dimesio@earthlink.net 2012-03-04 18:27:42 CST --- I don't think anyone is suggesting that we start trying to distinguish every possible external cause of a problem. But there are bugs that do get identified as upstream, and this would make it easier to find them.
As for these bugs being invalid, the practice has been to keep them open to collect duplicates and not mark them as invalid until they are going to be closed, e.g., bug 23323 was kept open with a resolution of NEW for over four months with (not a Wine bug) in the summary. That's inaccurate and sends a contradictory message to users. It would be much clearer to mark these bugs Resolved, Upstream as soon as that becomes apparent, leave them open to collect duplicates as long as the upstream bug is open, and simply close them when the upstream bug is closed.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26630
--- Comment #11 from Dmitry Timoshkov dmitry@baikal.ru 2012-03-04 22:38:39 CST --- This would create additional burden for tracking such bugs for no value. Just mark them as invalid and ask the reporter to open a bug in his/her distro bug tracker, and let the distro follow an appropriate upsteam bug (if that's their policy).
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26630
--- Comment #12 from Jerome Leclanche adys.wh@gmail.com 2012-03-05 04:18:10 CST --- (In reply to comment #11) As a user, it sucks being told "your bug is invalid" when it, in fact, is not. Especially when it's serious stuff eg Xorg crashes, black screens, or even reboots.
Upstream at least means "We're taking care of it" somehow.
Mark a bug as invalid out of the blue and the reporter will likely get offended. I know you don't care but that means they won't file squat; which means either the bug won't get fixed (bad on *all* the users), or the bugzilla janitors have to take care of that. Turns out, if you're nice with them, they *will* follow the bug through and do whatever you ask them in order to get it fixed. Now I may just be a wine bugzilla janitor, but I still want to see non-wine bugs triggered by wine fixed.
And no, it's not a maintenance burden. I already make sure users report bugs upstream and add it to the See Also URL. Resolving it UPSTREAM is just hitting a different option on the dropdown.
I propose RESOLVED UPSTREAM once the bug is filed, and CLOSED UPSTREAM once it's closed upstream for whatever reason. Thoughts?
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26630
--- Comment #13 from Alexandre Julliard julliard@winehq.org 2012-03-05 04:47:35 CST --- (In reply to comment #12)
I propose RESOLVED UPSTREAM once the bug is filed, and CLOSED UPSTREAM once it's closed upstream for whatever reason. Thoughts?
Sounds good to me.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26630
Jerome Leclanche adys.wh@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution| |FIXED
--- Comment #14 from Jerome Leclanche adys.wh@gmail.com 2012-03-05 13:16:59 CST --- UPSTREAM added. Sweet. :)
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26630
Jerome Leclanche adys.wh@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |CLOSED
--- Comment #15 from Jerome Leclanche adys.wh@gmail.com 2012-03-05 13:17:12 CST --- WineHQ bugzilla bug, closing.
-
wine-bugs＠winehq.org