This thread seems like a powerful lot of noise about something any maintainer worth his salt would notice in his daily grep-excuses mails. Sven Luther wrote: > Yes, sure. But then again, we only have so much free time, and we > prioritize it differently. It happened for me back then, with the > active-dvi package. At the time there was a FTBFS bug or something such > not really all that problematic, and i knew there was going to be a new > upstream release nextly. You may think that an upcoming new release is an acceptable excuse to not fix a FTBFS bug immediatly. Often though, you will be wrong in that assumption. Sometimes when some new version of a library is trying to get into testing it will be blocked until all packages that use it are rebuilt on all arches to use it. Now consider what happens if your package uses that library, and has a FTBFS, and you are off ignoring the bug report waiting for some special event before doing an upload. That's right, your package ends up blocking the library from testing. This will often result in mails from the release manager or a helper, may get MIA tracking looking at you, and may result in your package being removed from testing so that the library can get in. Current examples of this kind of thing include the new vorbis and clanlib libraries and the various packages that are keeping them out of testing. So no, I don't think "I'm waiting on a new upstream release/blue moon/white christmas" is a good reason to ignore any bug report, and especially not any release critical bug report. It's just a lame excuse. -- see shy jo  Unless of course the new release is the only known fix for the bug.
Description: PGP signature