Re: RFC: Changing the NM system

[cjw44@flatline.org.uk (Colin Watson)]

Petr Cech <cech@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> wrote:
>On Sun, Dec 17, 2000 at 12:04:08AM +0100 , Cord Beermann wrote:
>> When i look into the BTS, i see a lot of bugs, that are somehow fixed,
>> but not closed, or bugs where no one has touched them for years.
>> (not even 'wontfix' or 'moreinfo' -actions.)
>
>do you remember, how long are those tags supported? 1 month? come on

I don't think anything ever kept maintainers from mailing a bug and
saying "I'm not going to fix this bug" or "I need more information",
whether the tag was there or not.

http://lintian.debian.org/reports/Tancient-standards-version.html is a
good source of the sort of packages Cord's describing (though of course
there are actively maintained packages in there too); setting
Standards-Version: 3.0.0 as a minimum [1] sometime soon would be a good
way of pinging all those packages and making sure their maintainers are
awake.

[1] I.e. agreeing that release-critical bugs should be filed against
    packages listing an older policy version.

-- 
Colin Watson                                     [cjw44@flatline.org.uk]