[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 Tue, 03 Jun 2003 07:42:05 +1000, Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> said: 

> Matt Zimmerman <mdz@debian.org> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 02, 2003 at 09:07:00PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
>>> OK.  Let me ask you this question: 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".
>>> Do you have a problem with this and if so why?
>> Yes.  There is no record in the package that a bug report in the
>> Debian BTS was closed in this version.  What about other users who
>> experienced the same

> Why should that be in the package? What if you didn't know at the
> time that the bug was fixed in this version?


>> bug?  Is it so hard to explain what bug was fixed, and if possible,
>> how it was fixed?

> Remember that I'm talking about closing a bug in the BTS by hand.
> So what was fixed is obvious.  If you want to require everyone to
> explain how it was fixed, well I don't think there is anything more
> I can say to you.

	Why, thank you. I am so stating: bug closed without
 explanation need to be reopened. And since you have nothing to say to
 me, I suppose this flame war is winding down?

Trap full -- please empty.
Manoj Srivastava   <srivasta@debian.org>  <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05  CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C

Reply to: