[Trisquel-devel] New bugtracker workflow proposal

Michał Masłowski mtjm at mtjm.eu
Fri Mar 6 21:19:08 CET 2015

>     - I assume it will be obvious for users that packages in default
>     install
>     aren't in the "Packages" component.
> May be not for new users, but that's why there is a "Confirmed" state,
> so general users can fill bugs, and more experienced ones help with.
> What about removing "Packages" and use "Live System" for packages in
> default install, and "Trisquel" for others?

"Live system" would seem appropriate for bugs that were observed on the
live system only.  "Preinstalled packages", "Other packages"?

>     - Do Upstream issues have this workflow: New -> Confirmed (after
>     next
>     release) -> Closed?
> The "After next release" is up to upstream, not us. It means the bug
> will be closed on trisquel once is closed upstream, and a new version
> is packaged.

I.e. it will be closed when Trisquel obtains a version derived from
fixed upstream (e.g. by new release or backports).  Until this is done,
in which state is the package kept?

> IMHO, any FSDG bug is a License problem ( may be we can should call it
> "FSDG" instead) , not a branding issue, so they will fit under
> "License problems" category.

Ok, branding is like new icons and wallpapers, not like showing Trisquel
logo instead of Ubuntu's.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 818 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listas.trisquel.info/pipermail/trisquel-devel/attachments/20150306/da7e2267/attachment.pgp>

More information about the Trisquel-devel mailing list