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

Re: Bugs in Backported Packages

Quoting Steve Langasek (vorlon@debian.org):

> A single package I'm comaintainer of that has a backports.org backport has
> received at least 12 bug reports to the BTS over the past year referencing
> bpo versions (not counting any that might have been retargeted using
> found/notfound after being filed).  The reason there are few bug reports on
> the mailing list is because these *already* come to the BTS.

Are you talking about samba, Steve?

If so, you're right that we get some bug reports about our bpo
packages....but it happens that backports are done by your
comaintainer..:-)...and we already noticed several times that these
bugs helped us (OK, often me, indeed) working on bugs on our testing
packages. We even sometimes ask users who report issues on packages in
stable to try teproducing them with backports;.:)

So, in that case of a package where backports are very important to
users, I think that having the bugs in the BTS is a benefit. It indeed
goes along with the fact that the regular maintainers (at least one of
them) cared enough abotu backports to do the work him|herself.

If you're not talking about samba, then most of what I'm saying is not

How about a kind of opt-in system where bugs sent to bpo packages
would by default *not* be sent inserted in the BTS....unless the
maintainer (the "official" one) accepts this. That could be done with
a special control field in debian/control of the backported package
(that would assume some kind of pre-agreement between the main
maintainer and the backport uploader).

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: