[Debian-olpc-devel] python-vte 0.22.3 (bugfix) for lenny

[Jonas Smedegaard]

On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 05:31:38PM +0100, Sascha Silbe wrote:
>On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 04:46:09PM +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
>
>>Even better, however, if instead of posting here you file as 
>>bugreport   against sugar-pippy-activity.
>Being lazy I've just forwarded your mail to submit at bugs.debian.org 
>(with Packages: and a terse summary). Curious to see how well 
>bugs.debian.org handles nested MIME parts. :)

Thanks!

And don't hesitate filing bugreports against the psuedo-package 
bts at bugs.debian.org (hope I recall the name correctly) if you discover 
weaknesses in the tool - I am sure such reports are appreciated :-)


>In general I don't file bugs against unofficial packages at 
>bugs.debian.org, but now you mention it ISTR you saying it's fine for 
>the Sugar packages. :)

I guess that ISTR == "I seem to recall", right?

Yes, I encourage filing bugreports against packages that I maintain, 
even if using the packages in "polluted" environments or even in 
completely derived ones, and even if using recompiled or patched 
packages.

I just ask that any known oddities are clearly mentioned when reporting, 
to allow me to maybe lower the time and passion devoted to too weird (to 
me) uses of the packaging - while still allowing same level of 
transparancy as for "official" use, and allow others to work on solving 
issues even when I won't/don't.

Hope that makes sense.  And hope that I am not alone in that mindset.


  - Jonas

-- 
* Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
* Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

  [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/debian-olpc-devel/attachments/20091113/6fab28ac/attachment-0001.pgp>