Re: The new installer
Josip Rodin wrote:
> The same NMUer, or another NMUer, can continue to NMU new versions and
> thus ensure it remains fixed.
Of course, this begs the question: why doesn't this person just adopt the
package?
> OTOH when the maintainer closes the bug, that in itself doesn't mean
> he's going to ensure it's fixed in a new version -- they may not even
> be the package's maintainer any longer when the next version comes
> out.
If he closes the bug, then he has "taken responsibility" for it, whoever
he is. Either it is fixed or it is a non-issue. Perhaps there are other
possibilities, but in the vast majority of cases, those are the only two
results. If a new version comes out and the problem is not resolved, then
the bug report should be (and often is) reopened.
> Interesting how the exact rationale is undocumented. Or at least I
> can't find it anywhere.
Oh well. Just take it as current practice. FWIW, I'm going on the
documentation in /usr/share/doc/debian/bug-maint-info.txt.gz and my
interpretation of what it says. In my opinion, the procedures outlined in
this document make sense and lead to a system that works and is clearly
defined, even if the rationale for what it specifies is not exactly clear.
In any case, it is important when debating the original topic of this
thread to keep in mind how the BTS is supposed to work and what it means
to close a bug, as defined by the documentation available on the system.
My original comment on the rationale was only speculative, and I tried to
identify it as such.
- Brian
Reply to: