Bug#503544: ath5k: after suspend to RAM, requires cold boot to work again

[Moritz Muehlenhoff <jmm@inutil.org>]

In gmane.linux.debian.devel.kernel, you wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 29, 2009 at 9:21 AM, maximilian attems <max@stro.at> wrote:
>>> I have to say I really don't appreciate the style of bug management
>>> where I file a bug, there is no response for months on end, and then I
>>> get a request to try a newer version.  It gives the impression that
>>> you're not actually doing anything about the bugs.
>>
>> ath5k was quite young on 2.6.26 so it was somehow expected to fail there.
>
> I would have appreciated being told that within a few days of
> reporting the bug; it would have been useful information then.
>
>> also you didn't seem to provide any updates
>
> I provided all the information I had in the initial bug report.  I
> would have responded to requests for further information if asked, but
> no one asked.
>
>> nor did you go upstream.
>
> I don't have the slightest idea how to report a bug to the kernel
> upstream.

It's a standard Bugzilla installation: http://bugzilla.kernel.org

> Isn't forwarding bugs to upstream part of a Debian
> maintainer's responsibilities?

While this works well for application software bugs, kernel bugs tend
to require hardware-specific test/feedback requests from the
relevant subsystem maintainer. All the Debian maintainers could
do is to forward mails around and inducing needless overhead and
delay.

Also there's a resource shortage of kernel maintainers.

But you do have a point, there needs to be better documentation
and reportbug should have some tweaks and better user guidance
for kernel bug reports. I'll file some enhancement bugs soon.

Cheers,
        Moritz