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

Re: Submitting bugs for manpage improvements

Frank Lin PIAT <fpiat@klabs.be> writes:

> A. We could have a different work-flow for (non)-native package:
>  - For non-native package, we could instruct people to submit the
>    diff-file to the upstream maintainer.

Surely a big part of the job of a Debian package maintainer is to be an
interface between upstream developers and Debian users, even nit-picky

> B. We could provide a way so maintainer could declare whether
>    the bug should be filed upstream or to the BTS.

AFAICT, it's always appropriate for a bug report on a Debian package to
go to the Debian BTS. (Notice that this says nothing about
appropriateness of sending a bug report to upstream; only that a bug
report to Debian's BTS is appropriate if it's for a Debian package.)

I don't think we should be putting mechanisms for Debian package
maintainers to deflect Debian user bug reports away from themselves, or
discourage bug reports. It's part of the territory one accepts as a
package maintainer.

If the bug then needs to be forwarded upstream, that facility is also
there, as is severity ‘wishlist’ and, in extremis, the ‘wontfix’ tag.

> C. We could ship the tool in a package that is usually installed
>    by developers only (shipping the script in a package like 
>    devscripts, rather than installing it by default)

This sounds like a good answer. I would think this tool doesn't deserve
to be recommended by default like ‘reportbug’, but is rather a workflow
tool for those who expect to be making multiple such manpage bug
reports, only recommended in specific use cases.

 \           “Laugh and the world laughs with you; snore and you sleep |
  `\                                                alone.” —anonymous |
_o__)                                                                  |
Ben Finney

Reply to: