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: <Yznti0ca4g/hsm/T@pendragon.ideasonboard.com>
Date:   Sun, 2 Oct 2022 22:59:07 +0300
From:   Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>
To:     "Artem S. Tashkinov" <aros@....com>
Cc:     Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
        Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@...mhuis.info>,
        Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Konstantin Ryabitsev <konstantin@...uxfoundation.org>,
        workflows@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        "regressions@...ts.linux.dev" <regressions@...ts.linux.dev>,
        ksummit@...ts.linux.dev,
        Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@....com>
Subject: Re: Planned changes for bugzilla.kernel.org to reduce the "Bugzilla
 blues"

On Sun, Oct 02, 2022 at 12:49:04PM +0000, Artem S. Tashkinov wrote:
> On 10/2/22 12:18, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 01, 2022 at 02:58:04PM +0000, Artem S. Tashkinov wrote:
> >>
> >> My expectations are actually quite low:
> >>
> >> * A central place to collect bugs (yeah, bugzilla)
> >> * Proper up to date components (they don't change too often, so there's
> >> not a lot of work to be done - you can refresh them probably every 12-24
> >> months and it's gonna be totally OK)
> >> * An ability to CC the relevant people/mailing lists (this is the only
> >> serious missing feature)
> >>
> >> That's it. It's a billion times better than random emails sent to random
> >> mailing lists. Signing up once is easier that to keep track of whom and
> >> where you've emailed or not. And of course it's a ton lot easier to find
> >> the existing bug reports.
> >
> > First of all, some of the components do CC the relevant mailing lists
> > automatically.  And this is the part of Bugzilla which is hand-hacked
> > and has no, zero, nada support upstream.  I'll defer to Konstantin
> > about how easy it is to keep that working.
> >
> > Secondly, not everyone is happy with getting an e-mail message sent to
> > a mailing list that has a lot of bugzilla metadata associated with it,
> > and depending on how they respond, the response might not make it back
> > to bugzilla.
> 
> I've mentioned it a dozen times already - you're unhappy with emails
> from bugzilla? Go there and unsubscribe. It takes a minute and we're
> talking as if it's the actual issue we are dealing with. It's not.
> Bugzilla maintenance and its up-to-date status are the issues.
> 
> >
> > Finally, in the absense of someone to actually close bugzilla entries
> > and do other necessary grooming, the bugzilla database will rapidly
> > become useless --- in which case, you might as well have a web form
> > that just helps the user send e-mail to the mailing list, and hope it
> > doesn't become a SPAM magnet.
> 
> The current ill-maintained semi-functional bugzilla has proven to be a
> ton more useful than random mailing lists no sane person can keep track
> of. Bug "reports", i.e. random emails are neglected and forgotten. LKML
> is the worst of them probably.
> 
> >
> >> Bugzilla as it is works nearly perfectly. We have a number of developers
> >> who don't want to touch it or get emails from it - it's their right.
> >> However it would be madness to take it from users. That will make filing
> >> and following up on bug reports an absolutely poor experience for
> >> absolute most users.
> >
> > At the moment, developers aren't following up on the bug reports.
> > There is some debate as to why.  Is it because users who can't figure
> > out how to send e-mail, and who send web-form based e-mails send low
> > quality bug reports that can't be easily responded to unless someone
> > is paid $$$ and/or has the patience of a saint?  Is it because
> > components aren't being gatewayed to mailing lists?
> 
> This is not always true, some of them do, some of them actually check
> new bug reports and do a tremendous job at helping people, e.g. Mario
> Limonciello who helps resolve bugs which are not even his direct
> responsibility. BTW, I'll now CC him since he's so active over there.
> Would be great if he chimed in.
> 
> > And if we force developers to get Bugzilla spam whether they want it
> > not, and they said, "absolutely not", is it there right to have the
> > mailing list gateway disabled --- and if so, what does that do to the
> > user experience?  Thats basically the situation we have right now.
> 
> As I've said many times already: bugzilla must be an opt-out, not opt-in
> experience/option.
> 
> Let's subscribe the past six months of developers using git commits and
> if someone doesn't like getting emails they go to the website and
> unsubscribe _once_ which takes a minute. This is a non-issue I've no
> clue why we're dwelling on it.

I'm not sure that would be legal, at least in the EU.

> Let's operate with some examples:
> 
> Bugzilla gets around two dozen bug reports weekly which encompass at
> most thirty emails, which equals to four emails daily on average.
> 
> LKML alone sees up to a hundred emails _daily_.
> 
> Getting worked up about it? I'm dumbfounded to be honest.

-- 
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ