In gmane.linux.debian.devel.kernel, you wrote: > On Sun, Mar 29, 2009 at 9:21 AM, maximilian attems <m...@stro.at> wrote: >>> I have to say I really don't appreciate the style of bug management >>> where I file a bug, there is no response for months on end, and then I >>> get a request to try a newer version. It gives the impression that >>> you're not actually doing anything about the bugs. >> >> ath5k was quite young on 2.6.26 so it was somehow expected to fail there. > > I would have appreciated being told that within a few days of > reporting the bug; it would have been useful information then. > >> also you didn't seem to provide any updates > > I provided all the information I had in the initial bug report. I > would have responded to requests for further information if asked, but > no one asked. > >> nor did you go upstream. > > I don't have the slightest idea how to report a bug to the kernel > upstream.
It's a standard Bugzilla installation: http://bugzilla.kernel.org > Isn't forwarding bugs to upstream part of a Debian > maintainer's responsibilities? While this works well for application software bugs, kernel bugs tend to require hardware-specific test/feedback requests from the relevant subsystem maintainer. All the Debian maintainers could do is to forward mails around and inducing needless overhead and delay. Also there's a resource shortage of kernel maintainers. But you do have a point, there needs to be better documentation and reportbug should have some tweaks and better user guidance for kernel bug reports. I'll file some enhancement bugs soon. Cheers, Moritz -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
