Bugs against packages from BPO
For now users of packages from BPO have to send a mail to debian-backports
mailing-list, according to . I don't know how you handle those bugs,
but they seem very easy to miss (even if email@example.com isn't a high traffic list).
I was wondering if it makes sense to ask (kindly) debbugs's maintainer to
add new special tags (e.g. “squeeze-backports”, “lenny-backports”) that
would work exactly like “sid”, “squeeze”, … tags that we already have. It
would help to have a better integration of BPO and makes bugreporting less
confusing for users. When implemented in debbugs, reportbug could
automatically add those tags if the package comes from BPO.
>From a maintainer point of view, this could mean more burden. But, if ever
implemented, debbugs can send a copy of the bugreport to the backporter
only, and avoid sending it to the usual maintainer of the package.
What do you think?
- from debbugs POV, is it feasible?
- from maintainers POV, would you accept that?
- from backports FTP masters POV, do you think it's a good idea?
If we can't agree on this proposal, can somebody tell me why we didn't try
to have a BTS for backports? I personally think that we could have those
bugreports on bugs.d.o directly and that there is no need for another
instance of debbugs, because their number isn't insane, as most of us tend
Mehdi Dogguy مهدي الدڤي