Re: changelog bug-closing should not be used unless the code changes
On Tue, Jan 02, 2001 at 01:23:15PM -0600, Adam Heath wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Jan 2001, Joey Hess wrote:
>
> > Bugs don't expire from the BTS.
> >
> > I dislike the practice myself. If my bug's being closed out of hand, a
> > personal email makes it feel a little less cold. (On the other hand if
> > my bug was fixed, I don't mind wading through the changelog to find
> > that..)
>
> I disagree with an entry of "Bugs closes previously: CLoses: #nnnnn". It
> gives no indication of when, how, or why a bug was fixed. When I was going
> thru the dpkg bug list, I sent lots of emails of the form: "This was fixed in
> dpkg x.x.x". If I was bored, I included the time the version was uploaded.
>
> It's not that much more difficult to send individual emails, then it is to
> write an entry in a changelog. And it is much more friendly.
So it's not much more difficult to send 50 seperate emails and wading
through glibc changelogs, than it is to just tack the bug onto the end
of a list? BS
BTW, this is a one shot deal. Note, I closed 160 bugs here, so it's not
like this was done for 3 or 4 bugs, where simple and accurate
explanations are easy. Also, the fact that I took this over with more
than 300 bugs, so I'm playing catchup.
Let's drop this conversation to the affect that it is a one time deal to
take care of as many bugs as I possibly could in the shortest amount of
time. It's not like I or anyone else makes a practice of this.
--
-----------=======-=-======-=========-----------=====------------=-=------
/ Ben Collins -- ...on that fantastic voyage... -- Debian GNU/Linux \
` bcollins@debian.org -- bcollins@openldap.org -- bcollins@linux.com '
`---=========------=======-------------=-=-----=-===-======-------=--=---'
Reply to: