Herbert Xu <email@example.com> writes: > Branden Robinson <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: >> >> On Sun, Jun 08, 2003 at 03:07:59PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote: >>> What I am saying is that entries like >>> >>> * New upstream release (closes: #xxx) >>> >>> is acceptable. >> >> ...if and only if #xxx was a bug reporting that a new upstream version >> of the software was available. > > Why don't you respond in a more substantiative way than merely repeating > your existing position? > > For a start, you can try to attack my argument in > > http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2003/debian-devel-200306/msg00244.html In order for that argument to fly, you'd need to add an additional changelog entry that said something like: * Bug fixes in upstream release (closes: #xxx ...) since I read any bug closed after the "New upstream release" as requests for the new release. Still, I don't think a single changelog entry should ever close multiple bugs unless the bugs all pertain to the same issue for other reasons that what the bug submitter sees. -- Poems... always a sign of pretentious inner turmoil.
Description: PGP signature