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

Re: Technical Committee: decision on #119517?

Manoj Srivastava writes ("Re: Technical Committee: decision on #119517?"):
> Ian Jackson <ian@davenant.greenend.org.uk>:
> > Indeed.  I think that this kind of tradeoff between different
> > kinds of costs is best left to the package maintainer.
> 	Unfortunately, unless this determination matches the one the
>  users make, we have an issue. If the user thinks the program is
>  broken, they shall report a bug. If it is summarily closed with
>  essentially the statement "I do not agree", the result is frustating
>  to the suer, who sees this as a flaw in the implementation (and we
>  are all agreed it is a Bad Thing), and every such incident thwarts
>  ones desires to report bugs.

Well, I agree that maintainers shouldn't close bug reports unhelpfully
like that.  Better would be a reference to some appropriate
documentation - eg `see README.Debian para 4' (assuming that there's
an appropriate paragraph there about needing to install xlib6g
according to the Suggests if you want to use cardinfo, or whatever).

Certainly difficult or unusual things to do with a package, that are
likely to become frequent bug reports or enquiries, should be in the
documentation, where conscientious users will see them before they
submit bugs :-).


To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Reply to: