Re: What to do with bug reports against non-existing/removed packages
2012/5/18 Neil Williams <codehelp@debian.org>:
> There's a big difference between these bugs and the rest - here there
> are clear migration paths to later packages which can be used to triage
> the bug reports in order not to lose reports. A lot of the rest *can*
> be closed without more triage work because the package was removed, not
> replaced. e.g. gcc-4.4 bugs may be applicable with gcc-4.7 and need to
> be triaged. The opensync/multisync bugs just had to be closed without
> even looking at any of them.
Yes, I fully agree with that for the packages-removed-for-good.
The thing is that a big % of the initial bugs (1500+ when I brought
this up, 1200+ now) is made up of the "gcc like" cases: gcc, emacs,
linux, libdb, python2.4, various java stuff, tomcat5.5...
I don't know if they're 30, 50 or 80%, but definitely there is a big
amount of real bugs still related to current software shipped in
Debian.
Another question, perhaps unrelated is, what happens with the bugs
closed from egroupware or salome (removed from unstable/testing but
still present in stable releases) when their users look for them in
the BTS? They would be closed and archived, I suppose, and users of
stable wouldn't be able to find them easily -- and them maybe report
them again.
So at the moment I left those bugs alone. I assume that they will be
autodeleted by some process when they're not present in stable
anymore, but perhaps are wrong and that's why there are such high
number of orphan bugs.
Cheers.
Reply to: