Bug#986152: Offer of help
On Fri, Jan 20, 2023 at 09:46:35PM +0000, Jeremy Sowden wrote:
> On 2023-01-19, at 22:56:39 +0100, Romain Francoise wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 19, 2023 at 7:01 PM Jeremy Sowden wrote:
> > > I've pushed all the work to my repo on Salsa:
> > >
> > > https://salsa.debian.org/azazel/shorewall
> > >
> > > Do you want to review it before I push to the shorewall-team repo?
> >
> > It all looks pretty good to me! In fact, it's a radical improvement
> > over the previous packaging with seven source packages.
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > I have not yet actually tested the packages in my lab but please feel
> > free to push your changes to the team repo, and I will do the final
> > testing and upload over the week-end. I can also take care of opening
> > the bugs to have the previous source packages removed from unstable.
>
> I was wondering about this shorewall-doc bug:
>
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=266957
>
> Once 5.2.8 is uploaded there won't be a shorewall-doc source package.
> Shall I reassign it to shorewall?
>
> J.
That's a good question. I think that the bug is actually assigned to
the shorewall-doc binary package, not the shorewall-doc source package.
Assuming that the shorewall source package will start to emit a
shorewall-doc binary package, I think that the BTS will do the right
thing and leaving the bug assigned to shorewall-doc is correct. In that
case, the source package association of shorewall-doc will change, but
its bugs will still belong to shorewall-doc (the binary package). If
you think about it, this must be the case, as closed and archived bugs
would end up being orphaned otherwise.
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
Reply to: