Re: unreproducable, but grave bug
Scott Dier <sdier@debian.org> writes:
> * Brian May <bam@debian.org> [011024 20:47]:
> > Is it OK to close a bug just because it is un-reproducible?
> Yes.
No.
> I believe either that the dataset is bad somehow (isamchk?) or that
> you have a special-case that is more an upstream related issue and
> not a strict packaging issue.
So what? A bug is a bug is a bug. It doesn't mean that the package
is bad, the maintainer is bad, or whoever submitted the bug is bad.
It just means that there is a bug. If it's upstream's to handle, say
so in the BTS.
> It's not bad to discuss bugs with DD's, just dont expect them to do
> wonders when they package the software, not write it.
No one is expecting wonders of the maintainer. Coordination with
upstream is usually good, but in this case, it's probably more
efficient for it to be done by the person with the bug.
--
David N. Welton
Consulting: http://www.dedasys.com/
Free Software: http://people.debian.org/~davidw/
Apache Tcl: http://tcl.apache.org/
Personal: http://www.efn.org/~davidw/
Reply to: