[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

When not to close a bug in a changelog...

... when you actually didn't change anything.
For example:

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.
    Closes: #130051.

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>-close@bugs.debian.org

That includes:
- 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 Schubert
        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.

Reply to: