Kevin Kofler wrote:
"Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
And if i'm not mistaken I think the KDE maintainers that are within the Fedora community wants bugs against KDE in Fedora rather to be filed upstream instead of Red Hat's bugzilla.
Right, KDE bugs should usually be reported to bugs.kde.org. They should get fixed upstream. Still, filing at bugzilla.redhat.com too can't hurt, worst case we'll just close it as UPSTREAM, but in some cases we'll backport fixes or even try to fix it ourselves if the problem is important enough and easy enough to fix. We just don't have to manpower to fix any and all KDE bugs by ourselves, not to mention that they should get fixed upstream so other distributions benefit from the fixes as well.
Kevin Kofler
If you took my source package and built it for inclusion in your distro, I don't think I would be very interested in helping your users. The first question I'd need answered, is "What is the difference between the version you (the user) got from your distributor and what I ship?"
For any significant project, I'm sure I would have entirely enough bugs of my own to sort out without worrying about bugs you might have introduced.
In the above, don't assume "I" means "John Summerfield" or that you means "Kevin Kofler."
Possibly the most famous incident of a distributor shipping much modified code (from a non-release at that) is the gcc project where RH took the current snapshot and distributed it as gcc 2.96. While RH took responsibility for its actions, it caused problems for the gcc crowd who got a lot of bug reports for problems not of their making, and for RH who got heaps from others, notably MYSQL, for years alleging problems in gcc 2.96 long after they were fixed.
I would say that, if you get KDE from the Fedora project, then it's right and proper to report them using the Fedora bug reporting facilities. If you get KDE from the KDS folk, Fedora doesn't want to know about it.
Fedora may well report the bug upstream, but that's not a reason to close it. Closing it implies there's no further action required because it's fixed (or diagnosed as not a real bug), and the fact of it remaining open allows people to see that it is so, add to the report and maybe see what's happening upstream.