Your message dated Tue, 18 Apr 2006 16:36:29 -0700 with message-id <20060418233629.GD14053@volo.donarmstrong.com> and subject line Blocks/Blocked-by bugs need to be blocked the same way has caused the attached Bug report 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 I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--- Begin Message ---
- To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>
- Subject: bugs.debian.org: merging should be allowed in different "forwarded to" states
- From: Christian Hammers <ch@debian.org>
- Date: Thu, 07 Nov 2002 23:07:52 +0100
- Message-id: <20021107220752.7572281C4@app109.hitnet.rwth-aachen.de>
Package: bugs.debian.org Version: unavailable; reported 2002-11-07 Severity: wishlist Tags: patch Hi When upstream bugs are getting merged they normally deal with the same problem and have no information that is intersting enough to justify sending them all to the upstream author. Therefore merging should be allowed if the "forwarded to" state differ. Attached is an untested patch. bye, -christian- --- scripts/service.in.orig 2002-11-07 23:01:32.000000000 +0100 +++ scripts/service.in 2002-11-07 23:01:55.000000000 +0100 @@ -449,7 +449,6 @@ &transcript("D| adding $ref ($s_mergedwith)\n") if $dl; $mismatch= ''; &checkmatch('package','m_package',$s_package); - &checkmatch('forwarded addr','m_forwarded',$s_forwarded); $s_severity = '$gDefaultSeverity' if $s_severity eq ''; &checkmatch('severity','m_severity',$s_severity); &checkmatch('done mark','m_done',length($s_done) ? 'done' : 'open'); -- System Information: Debian Release: testing/unstable Architecture: i386 Kernel: Linux app109 2.4.18-app109-4-imq #1 Sam Jul 27 13:14:33 CEST 2002 i686 Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C (ignored: LC_ALL set)
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
- To: 334000-done@bugs.debian.org
- Subject: Blocks/Blocked-by bugs need to be blocked the same way
- From: Don Armstrong <don@debian.org>
- Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 16:36:29 -0700
- Message-id: <20060418233629.GD14053@volo.donarmstrong.com>
- Mail-followup-to: 334000-done@bugs.debian.org
Blocked bugs (and those blocked-by) need to be blocked in the same way; otherwise merging them will produce an undefined state. Merging the set of blocks isn't exactly obvious either. The implementation of forcemerge will enable the second bug to take on the exact same state as the first bug listed, but that's not yet fully tested. As that bug already exists in multiple forms (see #14043 et al.) I'm closing this bug. Don Armstrong -- The solution to a problem changes the problem. -- Peer's Law http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu
--- End Message ---