[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Filing bugs with upstream

On Mon, Dec 20, 2004 at 08:47:45AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> Ian Wienand <ianw@gelato.unsw.edu.au> writes:
> > So say I've found a bug in Nautilus that exists in upstream.  Gnome
> > has a well maintained bugzilla where I can file the bug.  Do I then
> > file a Debian bug pointing to the Gnome bugzilla report?  I do I file
> > a Debian bug and point the Gnome Bugzilla report to it.  Or do I just
> > file a Debian bug and hope the maintiner files one upstream?
> In my opinion, best practice is to file a Debian bug, and rely on the
> Debian maintainer to file an upstream bug.  

I agree that this is a good practice.  Unfortunately, you can't
necessarily count on the Debian maintainer (even a good maintainer) to
deal with the bug on your behalf.  I always handle upstream bugs on
behalf of my customers for my packages, but as a project we seem to have
some internal disagreements on this subject and no solid policy besides.  

For instance, in the past, more than one of my upstream bugs filed on
Debian packages have been "lost" when otherwise "good" maintainers
decided that they didn't have time to deal with upstream's request for
information on a given bug.  In my case, I wasn't subscribed to the bug
(figuring the maintainer was on top of it) and I didn't even know that
upstream had asked for more information (which I could have easily
provided).  In effect, I received worse customer service by filing the
Debian bug than if I had just gone to upstream's Bugzilla and filed it

Bottom line: if you file a bug against a Debian package that you know is
an upstream bug, and you care about the bug, you had better come to an
understanding with the maintainer about who is responsible for what.


Kenneth J. Pronovici <pronovic@debian.org>

Attachment: pgpAzjkCI6ANR.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: