[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

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



Hi Santiago,

On 07-09-2025 13:21, Santiago Vila wrote:
Paul Gevers wrote:
The *default* of the BTS is to show the bugs affecting unstable.

No. If the default of the BTS was to show the bugs affecting unstable,
libplacebo in the view below would not show as "Resolved".


Sorry, I stand corrected. I was thinking of the expansion of https://bugs.debian.org/package, but that expands to display the binary package, not the source package.

So: I have to call those who advocate for marking bugs fixed in
experimental as "closed" in the BTS and I invite you to answer the
following simple question: Where in earth is stated that version
tracking *mandates* such thing?


The default behavior of our archive is that if you add a "Closes: #bug" to your changelog, that the bug is closed. I consider that "documentation by code" and long standing tradition.

If you can't quote an official document which clearly states that bugs
fixed in experimental *must* be kept closed even if unstable is still
affected, then please admit at least that this is a personal
preference of yours, and please stop suggesting that it's a
consequence of version tracking when it's not, and stop telling people
that they have to do it that way "because of version tracking".

https://www.debian.org/Bugs/Developer says
"""
Debian bug reports should be closed when the problem is fixed. Problems in packages can only be considered fixed once a package that includes the bug fix enters the Debian archive.
"""

and later

"""
Where applicable, please supply a Version line in the pseudo-header of your message when closing a bug, so that the bug tracking system knows which releases of the package contain the fix.
"""

This doesn't imply it must be kept closed, but it also suggests it's fine to keep it closed. If the maintainer of a package asks you to leave bugs closed that are closed by uploads to experimental, I think that they are entitled to do that.

I just want to preserve the traditional meaning for open/closed bug
for the cases where a bug is expected to be fixed in more than one
place (be it unstable/experimental or stable/unstable).


I think we don't agree here what the traditional meaning is of open/closed bugs in the context of the BTS. I suggest to instead of imposing your view on others, you better learn how to get the BTS to display what you want. It's powerful enough as far as I can see. I'll stop with advocating my view now.

Paul

Attachment: OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Reply to: