Hi Chris, Let me say first that this is my first time filing a bug with Debian and I am not completely familiar with the process yet. So if I made a mistake, please accept my apologies.
Chris Knadle <chris.kna...@coredump.us> writes: > I'd like to know what risks and/or problems this bug poses, in order to > understand how important this bug is and to figure out how it needs to be > handled. The bug is not security related; it is just an inconvenience. Usually, you can get the current URL via DBus and use that to script certain things. For example, getting the current URL makes it possible to not only switch rooms on screen lock, but also to switch back to the previous room on unlock. So nothing major, but something I noticed using the program and I wanted to help getting it fixed. That's why I fixed it upstream and I figured the best way to proceed was to now file a bug with Debian. > Mumble-server / Murmur defaults to not using DBUS, and does not depend on it > either for the package in Debian in order to allow not having DBUS > installed. True, but this is about the client. The default configuration on Debian uses DBus here to interact with the client from the CLI. > Mumble currently only has an "oldstable" backport right now, and no "stable" > backport. For a bugfix to a backport to be allowed, the bug is required to be > fixed in "testing" first, and the only way to get a package to "testing" is to > upload it to "unstable". Ok, sure, thanks for letting me know. That was just an idea because I realized that the bug severity was probably not high enough to warrant a fix in stable. That's why I was thinking of stable-updates or backports, but again, I am not completely familiar with the internals of Debian. I am willing to learn, though. The reason I included information about the bug also being in testing and sid was because reportbug told me to verify if the bug existed there. Happy hacking! Florian
