Sven Joachim wrote: > Bob Proulx wrote: > > It is one of the things I find annoying. This is default Debian BTS > > behavior and not really reportbug specifically. Debian has a Stable > > release but all bugs are triaged against Unstable. As soon as a > > package is uploaded to Unstable that closes a bug then that bug is > > closed regardless of whether it is still active in Stable. IMNHO it > > should be marked as resolved in Unstable but still open until the fix > > appears in the next Stable release. > > I guess this would not work out so well for package maintainers, since > they'd get so see dozens (or in some larger packages, hundreds) of bugs > that have already been resolved. But in this hypothetical proposed system that tracked bugs against the released version of Debian it should be possible to view bugs that have not been resolved. Even now it is easy to filter based upon tags. I would welcome a BTS that mirrored the release strategy. I believe that most Debian users use the released version of Debian. And that is a good thing. But of course the BTS was written for developers and developers are concerned about Unstable and Testing. Unfortunately users using Stable are disadvantaged in the BTS because of this. Perhaps the discussions of a continuously usable testing will improve the situation. Only time will tell. > And in most cases, there is no way to fix these bugs in stable. On the contrary. The way to fix bugs in Stable is to fix them in Unstable first and then work toward getting the next Stable released. :-) And to have the patience of about a two year wait. (Which I am not complaining about. A release about every two years is perfect timing for me. It isn't too often to be a thrash. It isn't too long that I lose touch with what is happening.) However if the release is every two years then on average a bug in Stable would only need to wait one year for the next release. > > The BTS operates outside of the current Unstable, Testing, Stable > > release flow and really doesn't know about anything but Unstable. > > That's definitely not true. But for stable, only RC bugs really matter > (those do not get archived unless they are fixed in stable). Bugs that > apply to testing will not get archived unless a fixed version is in > testing. I stand corrected. But I think that simply means I should have added the "mostly" modifier and then it would have been fine. :-) > > Some maintainers will keep bugs open and tag them with the release the > > bug appears in. (e.g. Tagged squeeze.) But that is all manual effort > > on the part of the maintainers. > > It usually does not make any sense because the BTS tracks package > versions and so the tags are only needed when this is not sufficient. > E.g. when a package has the same version in stable and unstable and due > to other changes in the archive (new default compiler etc.) starts to > FTBFS in unstable. In this case the bug has to be tagged "wheezy sid" > to indicate that it does not apply to stable. It is a flexible system. It can be used for both things. Bob
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature