When not to close a bug in a changelog...
... when you actually didn't change anything.
bison (1:1.50-1) unstable; urgency=low
* Closes: #113365 (Can't reproduce and never answered my email).
bash (2.05b-1) unstable; urgency=low
* Report is missing any information. Bug submitter didn't respond.
bug-buddy (2.1.6-1) unstable; urgency=low
* This wasn't actually a bug-buddy issue and the submitter found the
solution themselves. (closes: #146428)
IMHO bugs that did not require any changes shouldn't be closed by
changelog entrys, but by mails to <number>-email@example.com
- unreproduceable bugs where the submitter doesn't reply
- unreproduceable bugs that the submitter can't reproduce any more
- bugs that were probably fixed in some previous upload
(they aren't fixed by that upload, so the upload should NOT close them.)
bugs that somehow "disappeared" should be closed by a mail "probably
fixed in version x.y.z or x.y.w"
If the submitter says the bug is fixed in a test package you provided
(or in an upstream version he compiled itself, or upstream says they
fixed it) closing the bugs if fine of course; as is if you could
reproduce the bug before and can't afterwards.
erich@(mucl.de|debian.org) -- GPG Key ID: 4B3A135C
The best things in life are free: Friendship and Love.
Wer nicht zuweilen zuviel empfindet, der empfindet immer zuwenig.
Humor sollte immmer dabeisein, auch bei Problemen.