On Tue, 16 Feb 2010, Santiago Vila wrote:
> > You close the one in diffutils, I close the one in dpkg-dev once
> > it supports the new output.
>
> This is what I find confusing from a "formal" point of view.
>
> Either the bug is in diffutils or it is in dpkg-dev. One of the two
> have to be changed, but not both.
Both are going to be changed but at different point in time... and with
different justification.
> I've modified diffutils for the benefit of our build system, but that
> does not necessarily mean that it's a bug in diffutils, it's just that
> we prefer a workround now until we decide about the right fix than no
> fix at all.
Sure.
> BTW: The BTS allows a bug to be assigned to multiple packages. I think
> a reassign to "dpkg-dev,diffutils" would have worked.
It does, but it's not recommended any more because once you reassign the
bug you loose any version-tracking (the list of affected versions and
fixed versions). So we duplicate the bug immediately and one gets might
get closed with "in the end, it's not a bug for us" and the other with
a real fix.
> Anyway, I'm keeping this bug open, as that's the one we are supposed
> to forward upstream ("diffutils breaks dpkg-dev").
Well, keeping it open also means that diffutils won't migrate to testing
even if it's fine since it has a work-around.
> > Can you do it since you are the diffutils maintainer in Debian?
>
> Ok.
Thanks, I just saw your mail.
Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100216135523.ga1...@rivendell
