Re: Bugs for packages which don't exist anymore / missing maintainer
Goswin von Brederlow <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> Gergely Nagy <email@example.com> writes:
>> "Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo" <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
>>> So I have several related questions:
>>> 1) In general, what should the maintainers do to prevent such cases?
>>> I guess that one could reassign the bugs from the old package to the
>>> new one, but it seems obvious that this can be oversought easily,
>>> especially for libpackages where SOVERSION changes often. Is there
>>> any automatic mechanism in place to try to prevent this?
>> Not that I know of, no. For packages that change name reasonably often
>> (or well, most library packages anyway), I'd think it would be best to
>> reassign the reports to the source package upon receipt, so that it
>> won't get lost.
> Normaly bugs for binary packages show up for the source package too.
> Why do these bugs loose that link to their source package? Have they
> been gone so long the package isn't even in old-stable anymore and the
> BTS doesn't record the source package anywhere?
Pretty much, yes.