On 07/11/15 00:23, Jameson Graef Rollins wrote: > On Thu, Nov 05 2015, Maximiliano Curia <maxy@debian.org> wrote: > > 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? > 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. I support that approach for most cases, but it doesn't scale for teams like KDE that have only a small number of maintainers, an impressive amount of packages and a large number of reported bugs (and a tremendous amount of pending issues that shows that we are not very efficient as proxies). Also, a desktop environment can be used in many different ways, much more than the ones we can cover, and having maintainers acting as a proxy for use cases they don't really use or trying to follow a bug that they can't reproduce usually ends in a waste of time. As such, I find it better to ask submitters that have an upstream request to send the request upstream directly, they will provide better feedback and, in general, have more energy available for solving the issue. If the submitter prefers not to send the request upstream we might act as proxies, at least if we can reproduce the issue or understand the issue fully. > 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. Sure, the upstream bug tracker is a bugzilla bug tracker hosted in https://bugs.kde.org, in order to submit a new bug you'll need to be signed in, which means you probably need to create a new account. The "New" link at the top of the page starts the new bug submission process, you'll need to fill the product (okular) component (Printing) and then fill the rest of the fields as you see fit. It's okay to add the Debian bug url in the bug description, but try to make the bug report self contained adding the important pieces of information to the bug description. After submitting the bug upstream you could link a Debian bug to the upstream bug using the debbugs forwarded command. But in this case a message to this thread with the bug url would suffice. Happy hacking,
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature