Re: BTS version tracking
On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 03:41:43PM -0700, Steve Langasek <email@example.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 14, 2005 at 02:00:04PM +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 18, 2005 at 12:06:29PM +0100, Colin Watson <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > > (...)
> > > The 'reopen' command takes an optional submitter argument, so it was
> > > difficult to get a version in here unambiguously. Instead, we've
> > > introduced a new 'found' command, which says "I've found the bug in this
> > > version of the package". You can use this whether the bug is open or
> > > closed; if the bug's closed and you give a version more recent than the
> > > last recorded fixed version, the bug will be considered open again.
> > > found 1234567 1.3-2
> > > 'found' is now preferred to 'reopen' except when reopening bugs that
> > > were closed without a version (e.g. closed as invalid).
> > > When you mail nnnnnn-done without Version:, i.e. the old way of closing
> > > bugs, the bug tracking system does approximately what it always did and
> > > records the bug as closed for all versions of the package containing it.
> > > Obviously, this loses the benefits of version tracking, and is now
> > > intended only for pseudopackages and for closing bugs that were never
> > > bugs to start with. It's still OK to use 'reopen' in the traditional way
> > > to reopen such bugs in a versionless way, although the 'found' control
> > > command without a version number works too.
> > I was wondering, what is the correct way to handle when you're stupid
> > and close the wrong bug in changelogs ? (like i did with #321876, when i
> > intended to close #321976)
> AIUI, this falls under the use case described above for the "found" control
In the case i'm referring to, the bug is said to be fixed for a
particular version of *my* package, not of the bug package.
If I say it is found for a version, it will be found for a version of
the bug package, right ?
Or maybe one can prepend package/ to the version number ?