Bug#321888: acknowledged by developer (Blocks/Blocked-by bugs need to be blocked the same way)
On Wed, Apr 19, 2006 at 09:48:49AM -0700, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
> From: Don Armstrong <email@example.com>
> 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.
I don't understand the first sentence, but here's a proposal for
merging the "blocks": union. If bug A blocks X and bug B blocks Y,
then merging A and B means each of them blocks both X and Y.
Why does this make sense? Because the person merging the bugs
is saying that A and B are equivalent in some sense.
> 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.
With the exception of 334000, all the other bugs are from people
tripped up by a *trivial* difference between the bugs, e.g. a
different "forwarded addr" or bugs filed on different packages from
the same source.
Why should there be a separate "forcemerge" for such trivialities?
Just let the regular "merge" do it!