[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#509741: marked as done (Debian Policy note needed in the Reporting bugs page)

Your message dated Mon, 18 Apr 2011 22:27:07 -0400
with message-id <4DACF2FB.7080303@tilapin.org>
and subject line No need to give the same sort of information twice (or more) on the same page
has caused the Debian Bug report #509741,
regarding Debian Policy note needed in the Reporting bugs page
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
509741: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=509741
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: www.debian.org

In http://www.debian.org/Bugs/Reporting it is said:

"What package does your bug report belong to?"

"You need to know what package your bug report should be filed against.
See this example for information on how to find this information. (You
will use this information to see if your bug report has been filed
already.)"

"If you are unable to determine which package your bug report should be
filed against, please send e-mail to the Debian user mailing list
asking for advice."

"If your problem doesn't relate just to one package but some general
Debian service, there are several pseudo-packages or even mailing lists
that you can use to relay your message to us instead."

It would be very convenient it the following snippet was added:

«If you want to give any comments, suggestions, or criticisms about the
Debian Policy (or Debian Policy Manual) please send an email to the
Debian Policy List, debian-policy@lists.debian.org, or submit a bug
report against the debian-policy package.»

If you want to understand why please see #509732.

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Hi,

> From: José Luis González <jlgonzal@ya.com>
> Subject: Debian Policy note needed in the Reporting bugs page
> Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2008 18:26:11 +0100

> In http://www.debian.org/Bugs/Reporting it is said:
[…]
> "If your problem doesn't relate just to one package but some general
> Debian service, there are several pseudo-packages or even mailing lists
> that you can use to relay your message to us instead."
> 
> It would be very convenient it the following snippet was added:
> 
> «If you want to give any comments, suggestions, or criticisms about the
> Debian Policy (or Debian Policy Manual) please send an email to the
> Debian Policy List, debian-policy@lists.debian.org, or submit a bug
> report against the debian-policy package.»

I don't believe this is the place to describe how every package or
pseudo-package should be handle. If we add a special paragraph for the
debian-policy, why shouldn't we also add, one for the Developers Reference:

	If you want to give any comments, suggestions, or criticisms
	about the Developers Reference, please send an email to the
	Debian Policy List, debian-policy@lists.debian.org, or submit a
	bug report against the developers-reference package.

And also one about the reference card for the Debian system:

	If you want to give any comments, suggestions, or criticisms
	about the reference card for the Debian system, please send an
	email to the Debian Documentation Project,
	debian-doc@lists.debian.org, or submit a bug report against the
	debian-refcard package.

etc.

Regards,

David


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
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=v7fy
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--- End Message ---
Reply to: