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

Re: divergence from upstream as a bug

On fredagen den 13 juni 2008, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Jun 2008, Magnus Holmgren wrote:
> > The downside is that a bug can't simply be downgraded from fixed to
> > patched; it would have to be marked found and patched in the same
> > version, but that's hopefully a relatively rare situation.
> Why do we need to track which revisions have divergence?[1]
> Divergences aren't an issue for release managers, nor are they an
> issue for users.
> There are only two questions about divergences that the BTS needs to
> answer[2]:
>  * I'm upstream. Are there any divergences by Debian that I should
>    cherry pick?
>  * I'm the maintainer. Are there any divergences which the upstream
>    has merged which I can mark as undiverged?
> A simple, single tag handles both of these cases. The first is
> answered by selecting packages which have the tag which someone is the
> upstream for. The second by removing the tag when the divergence goes
> away by an upload to unstable (or a commit that will end up in
> unstable soon.)

Right. For some reason I forgot that a bug isn't automatically closed when 
it's marked fixed in all existing branches. As long as the new 
changelog/changes "command" (Fixes:/Patches:) causes the bug to be marked 
fixed but not closed, we're fine. I don't even think we need a new tag; a fix 
to a bug tagged "upstream" can be assumed to be a divergence until the bug is 
finally closed.

Magnus Holmgren        holmgren@debian.org
Debian Developer 

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Reply to: