[Evolution] Bug#586174: Bug#586174: Proper handling of upstream bugs
corsac at debian.org
Sat Jul 31 14:36:11 UTC 2010
On sam., 2010-07-31 at 14:43 +0100, Philip Hands wrote:
> Hi Yves-Alexis,
> I draw your attention to:
> Specifically the second sentence of the first paragraph, which you
> appear to have forgotten, where it says:
No I don't, I simply don't have time. So I'm maintaining evolution the
better I can. If it's not enough, then you're gladly welcome to help,
> You have to forward these bug reports to the upstream developers...
> I note that the construction "have to" should probably read as "MUST"
> instead, as per RFC usage, but it is reasonably definite even as it is.
> If we start discouraging bugs on the basis that we're rather busy, then
> the knowledge contained in the bugs will be lost, and will be
> unavailable to others who find the same bug.
I'm not discouraging but reports. I ask people to file relevant bugs
upstream because that's where they belong. If they file it in Debian
too, that's even better (and bonus points for filing them with the
according “forwarded-to”). But upstream is where the (upstream) bugs
will be fixed, not here, so it's faster to file issues upstream than to
wait for me to do it.
> Since you are confident
> that it's an upstream issue, it is to your advantage to have it recorded
> in the BTS and marked as forwarded upstream, as that should prevent the
> next person to find it from bothering you, and you never know, it might
> even get fixed.
And you know what, that's exactly what I do.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
More information about the Pkg-evolution-maintainers