Hi, On Dienstag, 2. November 2010, Christoph Berg wrote: > Another idea would be to ask for the creation of a pseudo package that > would collect bug reports for packages where backporter and maintainer > differ. wah. IMO the right fix is to always use the BTS for backports. Everything else is just a bad workaround. I know that some maintainers dont want to be bothered with backports, but I consider that plainly wrong. Obviously they are entitled to have that opinion, and noone can force volunteers to do anything, but IMO that attitude is a disservice to both our users and our project. IMO backports where the BTS should not be used should be rejected. And for those maintainers who dont want to be bothered by bugs in the backports of their package, the BTS should allow them not to receive mails, but other teammembers (eg those doing the backport) should use the BTS. And all packages should be team maintained anyway, right? ;-p cheers, Holger
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.