Re: BTS version tracking
----- Forwarded message from Mike Hommey <email@example.com> -----
From: Mike Hommey <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: BTS version tracking
To: Colin Watson <email@example.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org
>>> I'm really dumb today, I managed to send that to a wrong address.
>>> Additionally, I also managed to re-close the wrong bug (see below).
>>> I should just stop debian work for today.
On Mon, Jul 18, 2005 at 12:06:29PM +0100, Colin Watson <email@example.com> wrote:
> The 'reopen' command takes an optional submitter argument, so it was
> difficult to get a version in here unambiguously. Instead, we've
> introduced a new 'found' command, which says "I've found the bug in this
> version of the package". You can use this whether the bug is open or
> closed; if the bug's closed and you give a version more recent than the
> last recorded fixed version, the bug will be considered open again.
> found 1234567 1.3-2
> 'found' is now preferred to 'reopen' except when reopening bugs that
> were closed without a version (e.g. closed as invalid).
> When you mail nnnnnn-done without Version:, i.e. the old way of closing
> bugs, the bug tracking system does approximately what it always did and
> records the bug as closed for all versions of the package containing it.
> Obviously, this loses the benefits of version tracking, and is now
> intended only for pseudopackages and for closing bugs that were never
> bugs to start with. It's still OK to use 'reopen' in the traditional way
> to reopen such bugs in a versionless way, although the 'found' control
> command without a version number works too.
I was wondering, what is the correct way to handle when you're stupid
and close the wrong bug in changelogs ? (like i did with #321876, when i
intended to close #321976)
PS: The recent changes to the BTS (version tracking, block
functionality...) really rock.
----- End forwarded message -----