Re: Closing bugs such as 210560
On Wed, 22 Oct 2003 14:04, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 22, 2003 at 01:54:39PM +1000, Russell Coker wrote:
> > On Wed, 22 Oct 2003 13:46, Ben Burton wrote:
> > > In all fairness, I don't believe calc closed a bug he thought was still
> > > open - the bug log shows that he believed it was closed with the 3.1.4
> > > upload.
> >
> > The messages related to the bug closing seem quite clear. They say that
> > bug reports through the Debian BTS will not be taken seriously and that
> > bug reporting should be done upstream.
>
> No it doesn't.
"If it has not been fixed please do not reopen the bug in Debian BTS"
Please explain your interpretation of the above quote then. When bugs are
closed without any testing or review and such a message is given, what
conclusion can possibly be drawn other than that the Debian maintainer does
not want any bug reports in the Debian BTS, and that such reports will not be
taken seriously?
Testing this bug takes less time than it takes to enter a message about the
issue. The fact that bug reports are closed whole-sale with such messages
shows that the maintainer does not want to deal with any bugs and wants them
just reported upstream.
As I said before I don't have the time to deal with upstream on this. If the
package maintainer does not want to deal with them and no-one else wants to
track them, then they will just remain as bugs in KDE.
--
http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/ My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages
http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/postal/ Postal SMTP/POP benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page
Reply to: