On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 12:52:22PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 19:32:19 +0000 Russell King rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk wrote:
There's another issue I want to raise concerning bugzilla. We have the classic case of "not enough people reading bugzilla bugs" - which is one of the biggest problems with bugzilla. Virtually no one in the ARM community looks for ARM bugs in bugzilla.
Nor should they.
So what you're saying is...
Let's not forget that it would be a waste of time for people to manually check bugzilla for ARM bugs. There's soo few people reporting ARM bugs into bugzilla that a weekly manual check by every maintainer would just return the same old boring results for months and months at a time.
I screen all bugzilla reports. 100% of them.
I'll try to establish whether it is a regression
I'll solicit any extra information which I believe the reveloper will need
I'll ensure that an appropriate developer has seen the report
And yes, the number of arm-specific reports in there is very small.
that just because you do this everyone in a select clique, who you include me in, should be doing this as well.
No. Thank. You.
It would be far more productive if the ARM category was deleted from bugzilla and the few people who use bugzilla reported their bugs on the mailing list. We've a couple of thousand people on the ARM kernel mailing list at the moment - that's 3 orders of magnitude more of eyes than look at bugzilla.
Is that linux-arm-kernel@lists.arm.linux.org.uk?
Yes.
If so, MANITAINERS claims that it is subscribers-only. That would cause some bug reporters to give up and go away.
Find some other mailing list; I'm not hosting *nor* am I willing to run a non-subscribers only mailing list. Period. Not negotiable, so don't even try to change my mind.