This is an old page that has not been updated recently; many of the items mentioned here are complete or obsolete, and the priorities need revisited on the remainder. -- bryce

High Priority

1. Semi-automatic bug forwarding to upstream bug trackers

   • Tracked at: ???

   • Rationale: Ubuntu receives a very high volume of bug reports which should be forwarded upstream. Making this process more efficient would improve both the quality of Ubuntu and its relationships with upstream projects.
   • Status: Some of the steps for this to happen are implemented. Additional work includes:

     • The "no upstream bug tracker exists" use case, which is described in https://blueprints.launchpad.net/malone/+spec/forwarding-to-email-address (Done?)

     • Comment synching to enable inter-bug-tracker replies (Done?)
     • Map remote bugtracker product/component to source package (Nearly done)
     • Forwarding of selected attachments from LP bug to external
     • Automatic user registration in remote tracker
     • Automatic fill-in of upstream bug report fields (title, description, priority, cc, etc.)

Medium Priority

1. Temporarily adding the uploader as a bug contact for the package being uploaded
   • Rationale: Our development model is such that packages are often uploaded by a developer who has no ongoing relationship with the package. Because they do not receive bug reports for the package, it is easy for them to be unaware of having introduced a regression.
   • Status:

     • https://bugs.launchpad.net/malone/+bug/3882

2. Visual distinction between bug comments from authoritative Ubuntu people and bug comments from random Launchpad users

   • Tracked at: ???

   • Rationale: Users who view and file bugs in Launchpad are not always familiar with the way bug tracking works in a large community project like Ubuntu. When they receive a comment which is inappropriate, erroneous or poorly presented, they assume that it came from someone representing the project, when in fact anyone with an email address can post a response. Users who find these bugs via web searches have difficulty telling the difference between comments from users and authoritative information from developers and QA. We want to avoid this confusion and misrepresentation, while still allowing everyone to participate, by visually showing the user whether the commenter is a member of an official team (such as Ubuntu QA), perhaps by showing the team badge next to their name.
   • Status:

     • original bug at https://bugs.launchpad.net/malone/+bug/81692

     • https://blueprints.launchpad.net/launchpad-registry/+spec/official-project-members covers this for Bugs and Answers

     • Launchpad claims this specification is related to the bug: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/launchpad-foundations/+spec/person-name-presentation

     • Not targeted in Launchpad 4.0

3. Prohibit filing bugs on obsolete packages (46385)

4. Bug Q&A

Low priority

1. Opening a new distrorelease before releasing the previous one (shortcoming relative to former dak infrastructure)

   • Tracked at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/soyuz/+bug/87012

   • Rationale: When opening a new distrorelease, uploads must be temporarily blocked until the toolchain and other basic infrastructure are in place. Opening the new release early would allow this work to happen in parallel, so that the new release would be immediately open for development.
   • Status:
     • PPAs make it possible to do some of the preparatory work for a new distro series
     • Fully handling this was not targeted for Launchpad 4.0
2. Notifying the release team of new milestone targets

   • Tracked at: ???

   • Rationale: The release team tracks outstanding targets for milestones and their resolution. However, they currently must poll in order to obtain this information. Asynchronous notification would be more efficient.
   • Status:
     • Structural subscriptions were targeted for Launchpad 2.0 (2009-08-03: update, anyone? Do we push notification now?)
3. Package version tracking for bugs (shortcoming of Launchpad relative to debbugs)
   • Not targeted in Launchpad 2.0
   • What does this mean exactly?
4. Subscribe someone (or a team) to a tag, e.g. 'regression'
5. Ability to clone a bug
6. Hiding comments or removing comments (Req'd by kernel team)
7. Soyuz archive index (Req'd by Software Center)
8. Search across attachments
9. Tarball visibility / navigation
10. Structured bug json data - aka "tags with values"
11. git support
12. search PPAs for version of app you want, for version of ubuntu you're on
13. a new status for bugs between the in progress and fix committed, for when you fixed the bug and waiting for merge...

Other stakeholder issues also relevant to Ubuntu:

1. Wiki markup in blueprints (OEM)

2. Task tracking in blueprints (aka Blueprint decomposition) (OEM)

3. Add a "workaround" field to bug (54652). (Corp Services)

4. Launchpad doesn't support multiple attachment (82652). (Corp Services)

Historical infrastructure needs