Re: Accepted kaffe 1:1.1.1-1 (i386 source)
On Fri, Aug 29, 2003 at 12:24:37AM +0200, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 28, 2003 at 10:41:54PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > That doesn't help all that much - it's also important see why the bug
> > has been closed.
> Because it is fixed...
The trick is working out why the maintainer believes the bug to be
fixed.
> > whatever it was I was trying to do when I generated the error rather
> > than by fixing the error handling.
> it wont help you, if it says "print a helpful error message". If you realy
Which is rather easily distinguishable from "Support $STRANGE_REQUEST"
and that's the kind of difference I'm talking about. It's also a bit
confusing if the bug has been closed in an unexpected fashion - for
example, by supporting a feature with a slightly different syntax to
that expected. Bug reports aren't always models of clarity and
sometimes maintainers don't always immediately grasp the issues being
discussed. A few words of explanation can avoid a lot of head
scratching and confusion.
The more informative and helpful the changelog the less chance the
easier it is to resolve any confusion that arises.
> care that much, look up the patch.
"New upstream release, diff only 1.2M!".
--
"You grabbed my hand and we fell into it, like a daydream - or a fever."
Reply to: