Luca - De Whiskey's - De Vitis <luca@debian.org> writes: > I really don't see the point in this. Submitters always have a copy of their > report, so they have evrything they need. > "New upstream closes: #1, #2, #3" implyes an update of the upstream changelog > file so it's worth of checking: listing changes already documented would be > redundant and not so helpful. Not all software has a detailed changelog. Most of the time, changelogs simply state "add feature foo" or "various bugfixes". You cannot ask upstream authors to refer to debian bug numbers in their changelogs (one of mine does that, but he's neat), nor do describe all bugs they close. Moreover, this allow users to browse the BTS to seek for more information in case they see a description of the fix looking like a problem they encounter. Cheers, Benjamin -- .''`. ; ;' ; Debian GNU/Linux | Benjamin Drieu `. `' http://www.debian.org/ | <benj@debian.org> `-
Attachment:
pgpGAjh2TpTbJ.pgp
Description: PGP signature