Re: How to deal with bugs from removed packages?
On 24/01/08 at 21:04 +0100, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> * Lucas Nussbaum <firstname.lastname@example.org> [2008-01-24 20:44]:
> > What's the best way to deal with bugs from packages that are removed
> > from unstable? Currently, they are not closed when a package is removed.
> > I can see two solutions:
> > - Close them. However, they might still affect stable or oldstable. So
> > closing them without a version might lead people to thinking that the
> > bug is solved. And I'm not sure that closing them with a version is a
> > solution either: there's no version we can use to indicate that a
> > package was removed.
> > - Leave them open and ignore them. However, it prevents them from being
> > archived. I'm not sure if bugs that don't affect unstable, testing,
> > stable or oldstable, but are not closed, are automatically archived?
> FWIW, this is something I'm taking care of (at least in theory). In
> the past, I closed all bug reports from packages that were removed.
> Some people were unhappy about this but it was the best solution we
> had. This changed with the introduction of version tracking. The
> idea now is to close them with a fake version number that is higher
> than the version that was removed (maybe something like version+removed).
> Unfortunately, I haven't had the time to write some scripts to do
> that, and I'm getting way behind. In fact, I haven't closed any bugs
> since July. :( I guess it's time to ask for volunteers to write such
> a script.
I think that the BTS learns the hierarchy of packages' versions by
parsing the changelogs. Would your plan work even if the version is a
fake one (not in any changelog)?
| Lucas Nussbaum
| email@example.com http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ |
| jabber: firstname.lastname@example.org GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F |