Re: Bug#1114180: libplacebo: FTBFS: dh_auto_build: error: cd obj-x86_64-linux-gnu && LC_ALL=C.UTF-8 ninja -j2 -v returned exit code 1
[ not sure why you decided to move to -devel, but anyway ]
On Sat, Sep 06, 2025 at 03:48:01PM +0200, Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
> On 2025-09-06 15:41:05 +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> > On Sat, Sep 06, 2025 at 03:35:41PM +0200, Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
> > > On 2025-09-06 13:09:38 +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> > > > Closing FTBFS bugs when they are only fixed in experimental is misleading.
> > >
> > > No, it's not. The BTS has version tracker for ages (even in Debian time
> > > scales).
> >
> > Yes, it is misleading for anybody looking at the web page and seeing
> > the bug at the very end of the page and closed. Not everybody uses UDD
> > to get bug information, there are still human beings browsing the web
> > pages to get information.
>
> If anyone opens the bug, they will see the information with versions
> affected by the bug at the very top. For every other tool, where open RC
> bugs make a difference (auto removal, testing migraton), also
> understand version this. There is nothing gained from leaving bugs that
> are only fixed in experimental open.
Nothing gained? Visibility. You admit that the end user using the web
interface still needs to open the bug in the browser to see the
versions affected, and only then the end user would realize that there
is *still* work to do.
But this would not happen if we didn't gratuitously close the bug and
respected the traditional semantics:
open = still work to do
closed = nothing more to do
Version tracking was supposed to help people, not to make their work
more painful or to force them to jump through hoops.
But it's your package anyway, and I will respect your right to keep
the bug closed if it makes you happy. I'm just stating that as
a user of the BTS web pages, it's misleading and unhelpful to me.
Thanks.
Reply to: