On Sat, Feb 19, 2000 at 12:57:27PM -0600, Steve Greenland wrote:
> At the risk of sounding snippy, the fact that a package doesn't suit
> your needs is not "release critical", nor does the fact that wterm is
> not 8-bit clean qualify as an "important" bug: presumably many others do
> find it usable. Lalo's proposed solution is perfectly acceptable.
I have not used this package, but I'm sure many European(*) users won't be
happy if there is a solution for this bug and it's not fixed for an
improper maintenance.
I guess this bug is the same that makes netscape 47 have a big bunch of rc
bugs. I have not seen anyone saying that is not an important problem.
Spanish speaking users can not write àccénts on those netscape packages,
there has been a discussion about glibc netscape, but not about those bugs
being release critical or not. I guess wterm is the same. Is there any
problems with the fix? Does it have secondary effects on the usability of
the package?
> > Please note that my bugreport gives detail description of the problem
> > and *bugfix*, so the real critical bug is "wterm is not maintained".
>
> A valid complaint, but still not release-critical, IMO (although
> Richard's is the one that really matters).
If the maintainer is not going to care about that issue that affects many
Debian 2.2 users, maybe someone should take over the wterm package and fix
it, or someone should do a NMU. I think these type of problems are ignored
because the maintainers don't have to deal with them. I wonder how much time
that problem would remain unfixed if the maintainer was German or French.
I also agree it's not a kind of bug that makes the package unsuitable for
Potato, but Alexey says there's a bugfix for this. The propper way to close
this bug is to fix it, IMHO.
Jordi
--
____________________________________________________
/ Rediscovering Freedom, Using Debian GNU/Linux \
/ \
| Jordi Mallach Pérez || jordi@pusa.informat.uv.es |
| Oskuro in RL-MUD || jordi@sindominio.net |
| http://sindominio.net |
\ telnet pusa.informat.uv.es 23 /
\____________________________________________________/
Attachment:
pgppeOZUrz6Y2.pgp
Description: PGP signature