Re: Lancelot locks accessing NTFS partition
El Miércoles, 8 de Abril de 2009, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. escribió:
> IMO:
> Even if you *know* the bug is a problem caused by upstream, you should
> probably file it on the Debian BTS if it affects Debian. This way it will
> show up in automated reports for the status of bugs in
> stable/testing/unstable and persons watching the package through PTS will
> be notified. Bug reports are actually one of the main metrics used to
> determine when a new version of Debian is ready to be released -- if there
> are bugs that affect Debian but are only reported upstream, that metric
> reduces in value.
Are you aware about how many Debian packagers has the Qt/KDE team? Do you
imagine how many time is needed to handle this? And not only the KDE people,
but other teams as well.
As Sune said, it's impossible for the Debian people to handle this, and even
from time to time a KDE upstream maintainer complaints about a bug report
that was lost in the oblivion in the bug tracker of a distribution, and not
reported upstream.
Of course, RC bugs should be filled in Debian too. But notice I said "filled"
and "too". I mean: users should report the problems upstream, in a central
place, because the people who are responsible to fix them, is upstream. Of
course you can fill the bug in Debian later, with a reference to the upstream
(using the forwarded tag), so Debian can handle the release, etc.
> Yes, you shouldn't copy upstream reports into the Debian BTS, but if you
> are running Debian and encounter the bug it should be on the Debian BTS
> (even if it needs to be somewhere else, too.)
IMHO, it should be the opposite thing. The bug should be in the KDE BTS.
Again: the people who are developing the whole thing, are the KDE people, so
let them know about the problem in the software they are coding.
Also, note that the Debian bug has the forwarded feature, so it feels quite
natural to act this way.
--
Alex (a.k.a. suy) | GPG ID 0x0B8B0BC2
http://barnacity.net/ | http://disperso.net
Reply to: