linux-kernel - Re: INITIO scsi driver fails to work properly

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <1198163287.3074.8.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date:	Thu, 20 Dec 2007 09:08:07 -0600
From:	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
To:	Natalie Protasevich <protasnb@...il.com>
Cc:	Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>,
	Filippos Papadopoulos <psybases@...il.com>,
	Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@...asas.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: INITIO scsi driver fails to work properly


On Thu, 2007-12-20 at 01:32 -0800, Natalie Protasevich wrote:
> On Dec 19, 2007 9:05 AM, Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx> wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 19, 2007 at 10:50:40AM -0600, James Bottomley wrote:
> > > So, to get the best of both worlds, file a bugzilla and note the bugid.
> > > Then email a complete report to the relevant list, but add [BUG <bugid>]
> > > to the subject line and cc bugme-daemon@...zilla.kernel.org  If you do
> > > this, bugzilla will keep track of the entire discussion as it progresses
> > > and allow those who track bugs through bugzilla to get a pretty accurate
> > > idea of the status.  You should never need to touch bugzilla again once
> > > the initial bug report is filed: all future information flow is via the
> > > mailing lists.
> >
> > The problem is that it appears to the casual observer as if they can
> > then add information to the bug through the web interface.  But that
> > information will never be forwarded to the mailing list.  Unless there's
> > a way of marking bugs as 'unchangable through the web interface' or 'all
> > messages appended to this bug need to be forwarded', Bugzilla just
> > doesn't fit our needs.
> >
> > The Debian BTS fits our way of working much better.  Perhaps somebody
> > should investigate a migration.
> 
> This is excellent observation by Matthew and James. There is no magic
> in bugzilla not being loved, it is just "not the right set of features
> for effective work on a problem". It doesn't support multiple
> developer' collaboration well.
> This distaste is not universal, since some people don't have a problem
> with bugzilla as is, maybe those who tend to work on problems
> "alone"...
> But making it to be a workable tool for everyone is definitely worth it.
> Any other favorite bugzillas that are nice to work with and that have
> the advantage above?

We have actually been trying for over two years to get bugzilla fixed so
that it suits our email and list publishing workflow for fixing bugs.  I
surmise that 90% of our problems with bugzilla could be solved if it
simply tipped a SCSI bug report onto the SCSI list when it was created
in such a way that all replies were gathered back into bugzilla.
Unfortunately, no-one who maintains our bugzilla has actually been able
to make this happen.  The other 10% of the problem is that bugzilla
doesn't seem to have a way properly to integrate people who insist on
using its web interface to reply into the email flow.

James


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/