Bug#147189: acknowledged by developer (fixed already)

[frank@kuesterei.ch (Frank Küster)]

owner@bugs.debian.org (Debian Bug Tracking System) wrote:

(some time ago, but I was on holiday)

> This is an automatic notification regarding your Bug report
> #147189: tetex-extra: two different versions of SIunits.sty,
> which was filed against the tetex-extra package.
> 
> It has been closed by one of the developers, namely
> Atsuhito Kohda <kohda@pm.tokushima-u.ac.jp>.
> 
> Their explanation is attached below.  If this explanation is
> unsatisfactory and you have not received a better one in a separate
> message then please contact the developer, by replying to this email.
[...]
> 
> There is no duplication of SIunits.sty as
> 
> kohda@nsx:~$ dpkg -S SIunits.sty
> tetex-extra: /usr/share/texmf/tex/latex/SIunits/SIunits.sty
> kohda@nsx:~$ 
> 
> so we should close this.

I disagree:

http://packages.debian.org/cgi-bin/search_contents.pl?word=SIunits.sty&searchmode=searchfiles&case=insensitive&version=stable&arch=i386

This is the file listing for stable, and my bug report referred to
stable.

I do not know wether policy allows to fix such bugs in intermediate
stable releases (where can I read about this?). But it would be nice if
developers answering to bug reports would clearly state wether they have
known the bug long before, fixed it in unstable and simply cannot
backport for policy reasons, or if something different is going
on. (Like the developer is running testing only and thus cannot
reproduce the bug, or not having time to bother about minor bugs in
stable or whatever).



Thanks, Frank
-- 
Dr. Frank Küster, Biozentrum der Univ. Basel
Abt. Biophysikalische Chemie