[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 Wed, 04 Jun 2003 19:19:58 +1000, Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> said: 

> Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> wrote:
>> On Mon, 02 Jun 2003 21:07:00 +1000, Herbert Xu
>> <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> said:
>>> 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".
>> I shall reopen it, and demand the full explanation I was promised.

> So apparently it is not OK to send a message by hand to
> xxx-done@bugs.debian.org with what I consider to be the most
> appropriate message for closing a bug --- by stating that the bug is
> fixed in a certain version of the package; but it is OK for someone
> to close the same bug by including a terse entry in the changelog,
> as in:

	In either case you need to include information about what was
 changed -- the kind of change involved, so that one has a sense of
 the magnitude of changes. You do not have to insert the diff in the
 changelog. (BTW, changing the sense of a conditional implies a single
 line change).

	A changelog entry implies a change in the package. Changes in
 the package that close bugs , whether from upstream or not, must be
 mentioned in the changelog. Is this simplistic enough to be clear?

	I contend that given the amount of confusion that this topic
 seems to have engendered, this discussion is germane to the -devel

The first thing I do in the morning is brush my teeth and sharpen my
tongue. Dorothy Parker
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: