Re: Gnome bug 94684
On 25 Apr 2001, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> There's a good reason.
>
> First, it is the sort of thing that might well be correctly solved in
> the Debian package and not upstream; that is, the best solution might
> be to provide a Debian upgrade path rather than a Gnome upgrade path.
>
I agree. Those are the little "value-added" things a Debian package adds
to the raw source. And it sounds like this is a trivial kind of thing to
fix. At the very least the maintainer should have a debconf screen
popup that says "Use KDE!" :-)
> Second, I can't keep track of who "upstream" is for all the Debian
> packages.
>
Why not? It's in the copyright file of each package. If it isn't--that's
a bug.
Zhaoway is right that you're a big boy and can talk to upstream
developers without having to go through a middleman.
> Third, the BTS is an exceptionally useful placeholder for "work needed
> here". If the bug remains open in the BTS, then it serves to indicate
> the existence of the problem until its solved, and someone might
> actually fix it. With Christian Marillat's excessively eager
> bug-closing, one would never even know of such things.
>
This is true as well. What is the point of a bug tracking system if not
to track bugs.
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar@debian.org>
Reply to: