Re: Bug#132767: acknowledged by developer (Reviewing policy bugs)
On Sun, 8 Sep 2002, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> >>"Matthew" == Matthew Wilcox <willy@debian.org> writes:
>
> Matthew> i don't know what mailing list manoj is so arrogantly
> Matthew> assuming i read, but i'm clearly not subscribed.
>
> You filed a bug against debian policy. Debian policy issues
> are dealy with on the debian-policy mailing list. Pardon me for the
> arrogance of assuming a debian developer would be cognizant of that
> fact, especially one who chose to file a bug against policy.
> Incidentally, the Debian policy update process is documented in
> /usr/share/doc/debian-policy/policy-process.*
Er, manoj, it'd help if you mailed the bts bug# when you responded to bugs.
You then don't need to mail -policy at all, as the bts will forward all mails
sent to a bug to the maintainer(which -policy is, in this case).
Also, where is it stated that one who files bugs needs to get all mails sent
to the maintainer of the package against which the bug was filed?
You are stating just that, by saying the bug filer needs to be subscribed to
-policy.
> Matthew> did he respond to the other point i made?
>
> You did not seem to make many points in your message. Indeed,
> there are only two lines or original content in the message, one
> asking which earlier mail (look into -policy archives), and the
> second misidentifying quoted-printable transfer encoding, and calling
> it mime shite, which I responded to.
He was bitching at the formatting of the mail sent to -done, not the content
thereof.
Since you are the one who closed it, it is up to you to make certain the
submitter understands why it was closed. In this case, the submitter did
not. So, it falls to you to explain in better terms.
By not cc'ing the bug#, you are at fault. Going thru the bts is the only way
to communicate this reasoning, and have it stored in the bts. Please use the
bts correctly.
Reply to: