On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 11:51:50AM +0200, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote: > On Thu, 2012-10-11 at 09:15 +0200, Mathieu Malaterre wrote: > > I believe the script is incorrect. It does not count ubuntu bugs that > > gets fixed in debian, without ever being referenced in debian BTS... > Well but it's up to interpretation, whether that wouldn't be a worrying > sign, too. I mean that bugs are fixed rather via Ubuntu. I wonder: did upstream developers start to worry when the number of bugs report they received *directly* started to decrease, due to Debian distributing their software? (Note: that started to happen "a few" years ago, like 15-20 :-)) They probably did worry, yes. But as long as Debian play it right with them, by triaging/forwarding bug reports to them as needed, no harm is done. In fact, the resulting ecosystem probably brings *more* users and bug report to them than before, albeit now they are mediated. Looks like the same situation. -- Stefano Zacchiroli . . . . . . . zack@upsilon.cc . . . . o . . . o . o Maître de conférences . . . . . http://upsilon.cc/zack . . . o . . . o o Debian Project Leader . . . . . . @zack on identi.ca . . o o o . . . o . « the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club »
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature