Hello, On 2009 m. May 29 d., Friday 20:47:23 Armin Berres wrote: > > I refer specifically to this sentence: > > "A big part of your job as Debian maintainer will be to stay in > > contact with the upstream developers. Debian users will sometimes > > report bugs that are not specific to Debian to our bug tracking > > system. You have to forward these bug reports to the upstream > > developers so that they can be fixed in a future upstream release." > > > > With this wording it would appear that the onus does fall on KDE > > developers to forward this to upstream. > > > > I invite your comments. > > I find it way less rude to tell you that it is not likely that we > forward the bug upstream instead of letting the bug rot the next 3 years > and then as you to report if the bug still applies. In fact, the "let upstream bugs rot for years" practise has already been in effect for *years*. We changed it a bit to "let users know about it so they can do something to get their bugs actually solved". I think it is better because: 1) The user knows that probably no real action is going to be taken on his/her Debian bug. Moreover, clear instructions in the mail help the user to get the bug actually solved (given upstream cares about the bug). 2) The user knows that debian kde developers think the bug is KDE (upstream) bug, not packaging bug. 3) We are still commited to solving packaging bugs or help solving grave/serious/critical upstream bugs. Clear separation of those two kinds means the bugs that we CAN solve do not get lost among the bugs we CANNOT solve. Regardless what manuals say, you can follow them 100% only if your package is small. But KDE is HUUUUUUUGE with lots of packages. In that case you have to change common practise to meet the reality of the real world. -- Modestas Vainius <email@example.com>
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.