One more topic for next week's meeting, it will be so much fun!

see: https://forge.fedoraproject.org/workstation/tickets/issues/131 for the history behind this.

This was discussed during today's meeting (meeting log starting at 18:46:51).

AGREED: The topic of package maintainer responsibilities - like monitoring Fedora bug reports - will be discussed async. (+4, 0, -0)

ACTION: Discussion thread created: https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/181434

Untagged with "meeting" while discussion is ongoing.

The discussion has concluded a while ago, I'll put it on the agenda for today's meeting.

This topic was discussed during today's FESCo meeting (meeting log, starting at 17:20).

AGREED: The text used by the auto-responder bugzilla script will
be adapted (the first sentence - "Bug reports for this component on
Red Hat Bugzilla are not actively monitored." will be dropped). (+6,
0, -0) (@decathorpe:fedora.im, 17:46:54)

INFO: Further improvements to the process (improving the
autoresponder text, using special bugzilla bug templates, moving to a
different process after moving off of bugzilla, etc.) will be
discussed separately. (@decathorpe:fedora.im, 17:50:29)

ACTION: sgallagh to make sure WSWG members are invited whenever
we next discuss ticket #3568 (@decathorpe:fedora.im, 18:23:49)

Adapting the auto-responder text was seen as an improvement, but underlying issues still remain, primarily: Intentionally not monitoring bugs on bugzilla is in tension (if not conflict) with guidelines around package maintainer responsibilities.

For posterity, @blc has implemented the initial adjustment. Now the autoresponse reads as follows:

Please consider reporting your issue directly to GNOME at https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/ to improve the chances that your issue will be resolved. This issue should only be kept open if it:

1. Relates to Fedora packaging or integration with other Fedora components
2. Is required for Fedora release processes, such as blocker bugs and freeze exceptions

If this issue isn't needed for either of these two reasons, please:

• create an issue with GNOME
• add a link to the GNOME issue here
• close this issue as CLOSED/UPSTREAM

Thank you!

Real life example: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2463841#c1

I reached out to @catanzaro and @mclasen today. They plan to attend the next FESCo meeting. Michael also agreed that

An issue creation template is of course a superior solution to an autoreply bot. That allows showing our message upfront rather than after you have wasted a bunch of time reporting the bug in the wrong place.

I suspect that if we go the route of the template, it will be accepted as a reasonable compromise between policy and reality.

AGREED: adjust the autoresponder as we wanted last week for now, explore a template for gnome-sig packages, discuss responsibilities changes on Discussion. (+6, 0, -0)