Re: Why no fix to daily RHN status emails

Thread: Re: Why no fix to daily RHN status emails

Search this list only Search all lists
Re: Why no fix to daily RHN status emails
	2007-01-24 13:02:39
Hi Daryl, Daryl Herzmann wrote: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198273 > > My goodness, posted 10 July 2006! You would think this is a simple fix, > but that bugzilla entry got wrapped up other enhancements or something > and currently has FAILS_QA! What is going on? > > I opened a support ticket to try and figure out what is going on and am > told it will be fixed in March! > > Perhaps fixing simple spacing takes 8 months, considering it took 2 > months just to get Auto-apply errata working again last year. Unfortunately, the complexity of a fix for an issue isn't the only factor in determining how quickly the fix will be released. I completely understand your confusion at why such a simple bug could not be fixed quickly, but please understand that the development and maintenance of a product as large as Red Hat Network is more complex than it appears on the surface. It was determined that this bug would most appropriately be aligned to the RHN 5.0 release, considering a number of factors including bugs of higher priority and severity and available resources. Since this bug was aligned to the RHN 5.0 release, it might be fixed in March since that is the current tentative release date for RHN 5.0. The 'FAILS_QA' state of that bug in particular means it's already been reviewed by QA and some progress has been made towards addressing the issue. It's quite typical for bugs to flip between FAILS_QA and ON_QA during the development process. I hope this explanation helps; in either case I apologize about the bug. ~m _______________________________________________ rhn-users mailing list rhn-usersredhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhn-users
Re: Why no fix to daily RHN status emails
	2007-01-24 13:24:49
Hello again Marian, On Wed, 24 Jan 2007, Máirín Duffy wrote: > Unfortunately, the complexity of a fix for an issue isn't the only > factor in determining how quickly the fix will be released. It bugs me when the same QA system failed to stop a bug then stops the fixing of the bug. Seriously, the patch to fix this is 1 or 2 lines of code? Hard to tell since RHN server is proprietary. > I completely understand your confusion at why such a simple bug could > not be fixed quickly, but please understand that the development and > maintenance of a product as large as Red Hat Network is more complex > than it appears on the surface. I'll have to trust you, since so much of the development occurs outside of the public's view. And, of course, we can't see the source code. > It was determined that this bug would most appropriately be aligned to > the RHN 5.0 release, considering a number of factors including bugs of > higher priority and severity and available resources. Since this bug was > aligned to the RHN 5.0 release, it might be fixed in March since that is > the current tentative release date for RHN 5.0. Has anything about RHN 5 been posted to this list? Perhaps public vetting of new features would be useful. I would really like to see an API addition, but so far, no comments on the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216694 > The 'FAILS_QA' state of that bug in particular means it's already been > reviewed by QA and some progress has been made towards addressing the > issue. It's quite typical for bugs to flip between FAILS_QA and ON_QA > during the development process. How big is the patch to fix this issue? It would be nice to see the source code and perhaps offer patches and such. > I hope this explanation helps; in either case I apologize about the bug. I appreciate you actually working with users on this list. It would be nice if redhat considered open sourcing rhn server so that users could see the development process and what is going on... https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166615 daryl