Re: Bug reporting proceedure, was Re: Bug#24066: libc6: rsh segfaults as , a result of new libc 2.0.7r2
On 30 Jun 1998, Adam P. Harris wrote:
> Enrique Zanardi <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > On Tue, Jun 30, 1998 at 08:41:32AM -0400, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> > > If you look at the list today, you will see many ancient bug reports on
> > > locales and timezones which pre-date glibc. How does one deal with these?
> > >
> > > I am tempted to close all "ancient" bug reports on principle, but that
> > > certainly violates the spirit, if not the letter of policy.
> > That sounds familiar. :-) The boot-floppies package has some "ancient"
> > bug reports that are difficult to deal with (hardware-specific bugs). Is
> > it OK to contact the bug submitter more than one year after he submitted
> > the report, just to tell him, "is this bug already present in Debian 2.0"?
> Yes I do this all the time. I email the BTS and the original
> submitter asking if they are still getting the bug, and telling the
> submitter how to close the bug if not (since I am not empowered in the
> NM case to close bugs). It has pretty good results if the submitter's
> email doesn't bounce.
Currently, nags are sent automatically to developers of packages that have
old bugs, IIRC. Could this mechanism be extended to also send the
submitter a message, asking him/her to try to reproduce the bug with the
latest version of the package? This could even be used to flag bug reports
as "submitter has gone missing" or something like that.
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org