Re: problem with recent-ish bugzilla upgrade
(well, I really don't want to pick on you personally, I just reply to
you because it's in this thread. This is really general)
On Tue, Dec 21, 2004 at 06:10:54PM -0700, Thomas E. Vaughan wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 22, 2004 at 01:34:49AM +0100, Michael Banck
> wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 21, 2004 at 02:05:23PM -0700, Thomas E.
> > Vaughan wrote:
> >
> > > I am operating under what is perhaps an antiquated
> > > notion. I seem to remember that, at least in the old
> > > days, years ago, every user of unstable was encouraged
> > > to subscribe to debian-devel.
> >
> > That is probably still valid, but it does not mean that
> > bug reports should be directed to -devel instead of the
> > Bug Tracking System.
>
> Fair enough. Perhaps you could consider my original post a
> bug report, but that wasn't my intent.
>
> I wasn't even sure if it was really a bug at all, or if it
> might be a bug with mysql, or with bugzilla.
OK, but it is the Debian Developer's duty to triage bugs, figure out
which are non-bugs (and close them appropriately), as well as reassign
bugs which are filed for the wrong package.
> I seem to recall on debian-devel in times past at least the occasional
> discussion which is resolved either by the filing of a bug report or
> by a nice, informative post that closes the matter.
[...]
> That's clearly the main point, but surely there is some room
> for the occasional discussion of misbehavior, especially
> when it's not clear what package might be at fault.
Sure. In this case though, it would be more appropriate to first file a
bug and then (in case there is no clear solution or opinions clash) to
include debian-devel for further discussion.
> Anyway, I'm sorry to have caused trouble; perhaps I should
> first have just asked the package maintainer.
Compared to other traffic on -devel, you have caused no trouble at all.
Also see my introducing remark above.
cheers,
Michael
--
Michael Banck
Debian Developer
mbanck@debian.org
http://www.advogato.org/person/mbanck/diary.html
Reply to: