Re: bug tracking
On 13 Sep 2003 16:30:11 -0600,
Andreas J. Guelzow wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2003-09-12 at 18:29, csj wrote:
> > At Fri, 12 Sep 2003 18:18:39 +0100,
>
> > Is it that much work to, as Osamu Aoki said, change the
> > priority or downgrade the bug? Then I'd know how I stand WRT
> > package. I know its limits, especially when the author or
> > maintainer rants "Yyyou moron, that's a feature not a bug!"
> > I might still continuing recommending the package, but I'd
> > qualify the recommendation with "You need to do this [trivial
> > hack] before you get it to work".
>
> If it is such a trivial hack to fix it, why didn't you submit
> the fix to the debian bug tracking system and to the upstream
> project maintainers (if you think it's a problem with the
> project rather than the specific debian package)?
I was speaking rhetorically. But I did suggest a fix. Alas I
don't know anything other than #!sh. I was thinking the problem
was trivial because it involved an "auto-detection" feature that
could be implemented using command-line utilities like "sed" and
"grep". And it's the only program of its kind, among the
half-dozen I have installed, that exhibits such a "bug."
> Did you even bother to file the bug(s) upstream?
I was informed that the maintainer was a part of upstream.
> You probably assumed that the debian package maintainer would
> have forwarded it to the upstream project maintainer, but those
> forwarded bug are very unlikely to be fixed, since it adds a
> redirection to the project maintainers ability to get more
> information about a bug.
Well, I thought it might also be a packaging bug. IRC the app's
Redhat-packaged version appeared to work all right. Maybe it's a
problem with the quirks (relative to Redhat) of the Debian
filesystem or whatnot that I can't get the app to run without a
minor tweak.
(Note: assume that this whole discussion is hypothetical. This
has absolutely nothing to do with bug #162308.)
Reply to: