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

Re: Bug#193497: marked as done (svtools: svsetup uses bashism "echo -e")

On Mon, Jun 02, 2003 at 10:29:56PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> >> what if the maintainer uploads a new upstream release which happens to fix
> >> bug #xxx, and then sends a message by hand to xxx-done@bugs.debian.org
> >> with the message "This bug is fixed in upstream version x.y.z".
> > 
> > The submitter would still have little information on what happened.
> > It's not like anything bad would happen to the maintainer if they say
> > a bit less tersely what closed the bug.
> Let me make this a bit more concrete.  Let's say that a user files a
> bug report saying that the kernel crashes when he does X, or that
> doing Y does not work as documented, or feature Z is missing from the
> package.
> What exactly is wrong with a message sent to the BTS by hand saying the
> "this is fixed in upstream version x.y.z"? Do we really expect our
> developpers to hunt down the technical details of each upstream bug
> fix before closing them?

No, but what exactly is wrong with explanations like "Kernel no longer
crashes on X since release x.y.z", "Y now does what's in the manual page",
"Z was added in the new release"? Do we really have to expect from our
developers to have such a lack of interest in what they're doing that they
cannot form a different meaningful sentence for each different bug, rather
than a generic response to the whole batch?

> Does the user really care?

Maintainers should do their part and leave the worrying about whether the
reporter cares to the reporter.

     2. That which causes joy or happiness.

Reply to: