Re: Gerfried Fuchs 2010-11-02 <[🔎] 20101102134047.GA2054@anguilla.debian.or.at> > * W. Martin Borgert <debacle@debian.org> [2010-11-02 14:12:21 CET]: > > Maintainers just have to accept, that they are not alone in the > > Debian project and that other people might share "their" package in > > the BTS, even if they don't care for a specific port, such as a > > backport. After all, everyone is free to ignore any bug report they > > like to ignore :~) > > Along the same argumentation people might claim that ubuntu bugs should > go to the BTS too and that everyone is free to ignore them. This is also about numbers and percentages. I would claim that most bugs people find (and report) in backports are actually Debian bugs, while Ubuntu bugs are often due to Ubuntu changes, a completely different system where the package is installed, and the like. > Don't get me wrong, I personally am totally in favor of having the > backports bugs covered in the BTS, because it just belongs there. But > belittling people's opinion on that grounds doesn't gain us much > sympathy. Everything can get filtered, but being able to opt-out before > even receiving stuff is a service we should make available to raise the > acceptance. Even though bandwidth and transfer limits are becoming less > and less regular we shouldn't ignore those concerns. Opting out is easy: add "Bugs: mailto:somewhere@else"; to the control file. My proposal was originally meant so people can opt-in to using the BTS for bug reports, I would like out-out much more. (Actually, if some Bugs: header is required, opt-in and opt-out are the same. If we don't require it, it's opt-out.) Does anyone have rough figures on how many maintainers actually do not want to be bothered by backporting bugs? I would imagine that even in the case where the backport was done by someone else, most maintainers would appreciate getting the reports. (They can still leave dealing with them to the backporter, but knowing what's going on is usually a good thing.) If these are a minority, that's even more an argument for switching to the BTS per default. Adding one line to debian/control shouldn't be too much to ask for. Christoph -- cb@df7cb.de | http://www.df7cb.de/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature