On Thu, Nov 05 2015, Maximiliano Curia <maxy@debian.org> wrote: >> Just saying "install cups-bsd" is not actually a >> good solution to the problem. If for whatever reason the user doesn't >> have cups-bsd installed, they have no way to know that the problem is >> the lack of that package. In the interest of user it would be a lot >> more generous to provide a notification that printing is not possible >> without the cups-bsd package installed. > > Right, that's an upstream bug, I think it would be better if okular used > qprinter directly instead of having a tweaked qprinter implementation, but > that might not be feasible, hopefully upstream should be able to assess this. > Could you report this bug upstream? Thanks for the response, Max. I guess the issue comes down to how much one thinks package maintainers should take responsibility for upstream issues in Debian software. I'm of the opinion that package maintainers should be the liaison between upstream and the Debian community. In my opinion, any bug in Debian software should be filed in the BTS. If the issue is not just in packaging, then the package maintainers should forward those issues upstream if that's where they need to go, or at the very least help the users through that process. The maintainers can be the point people for upstream, which relieves the burden of every user having to know how to file upstream issues against every package that they use. Everyone need only know how to file issues with the BTS, and the package maintainers can help do the rest. At least that's how I try to operate for the packages that I maintain. In any event, I would be happy to file the bug upstream if you could help direct me to the appropriate place to do so. Thanks. jamie.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature