In <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Alejandro Exojo wrote: >El Miércoles, 8 de Abril de 2009, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. escribió: >> IMO: >> Even if you *know* the bug is a problem caused by upstream, you should >> probably file it on the Debian BTS if it affects Debian. This way it will >> show up in automated reports for the status of bugs in >> stable/testing/unstable and persons watching the package through PTS will >> be notified. Bug reports are actually one of the main metrics used to >> determine when a new version of Debian is ready to be released -- if there >> are bugs that affect Debian but are only reported upstream, that metric >> reduces in value. Another good reason to file bugs that affect Debian in the DBTS even if they are already upstream: apt-listbugs. >Are you aware about how many Debian packagers has the Qt/KDE team? Do you >imagine how many time is needed to handle this? And not only the KDE people, >but other teams as well. If Debian can't shoulder the burden of maintaining KDE, they shouldn't be packaging it. Debian maintainers should be ready to receive bug reports from Debian users. I should not have to run another distribution or compile KDE from source before I file a bug. >As Sune said, it's impossible for the Debian people to handle this, No its not. It takes effort. But that effort is required of every Debian maintainer. Can you think how fast a RFS on the debian-mentors list would be denied if accompanied by "I won't have time to deal with bugs, please file them all upstream."? I am NOT saying I don't appreciate the effort the maintainers are putting forth now. If I could get both my jobs and the development I do for my local charity in hand, I'd pitch in and help. But, wrangling bugs is *just* *as* *important* as packaging new versions. It may not be quite as "sexy", but it makes for better software, not just more of it. >and even >from time to time a KDE upstream maintainer complaints about a bug report >that was lost in the oblivion in the bug tracker of a distribution, and not >reported upstream. Maintainers aren't perfect. They might not forward a bug they should have. I think upstream can forgive them that, since patches for bugfixes come up from the maintainers as well. >Of course, RC bugs should be filled in Debian too. But notice I said > "filled" and "too". According to the official documents, if you open a bug in the DBTS, you should not open one upstream, but leave it up to the maintainer. > I mean: users should report the problems upstream, in a > central place, because the people who are responsible to fix them, is > upstream. Of course you can fill the bug in Debian later, with a reference > to the upstream (using the forwarded tag), so Debian can handle the > release, etc. I get my OS from one source, the Debian repositories (and initially the Debian cdimage ftp server). I should only need to provide feedback to one source: Debian. Maintainers are ultimately responsible for what I receive; *NOT* upstream. If you don't have enough time to *maintain* the package, don't even bother packaging it. >> Yes, you shouldn't copy upstream reports into the Debian BTS, but if you >> are running Debian and encounter the bug it should be on the Debian BTS >> (even if it needs to be somewhere else, too.) > >IMHO, it should be the opposite thing. The bug should be in the KDE BTS. Not all bugs in the Debian-provided packages are KDE bugs. Occasionally, a KDE bug doesn't affect Debian systems. But the Debian user that found the bug definitely knows it affects Debian and should be able to report it to the DBTS, no matter what package it is in. >Again: the people who are developing the whole thing, are the KDE people, so >let them know about the problem in the software they are coding. Again: "the whole thing" that I get is the Debian package, and the maintainer is definitely involved in that. >Also, note that the Debian bug has the forwarded feature, so it feels quite >natural to act this way. Yes, but it is meant for maintainers to use when they've determined that the bug affects upstream. As far as the effort required to wrangle the bugs, this can be spread out by getting users involved. KDE itself has had some pretty good luck with "Bug Day"s where users meet developers on IRC (or whatever) and confirm/deny bugs, provide more details on how to reproduce, perhaps even try out patches. Last time I took it on myself to update bugs, I got some fairly stern emails indicating that changes need to go through the maintainers, but I am willing to help. -- Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. ,= ,-_-. =. email@example.com ((_/)o o(\_)) ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-' http://iguanasuicide.net/ \_/
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.