On Sun, Jan 15, 2006 at 03:20:14PM +0100, José Luis Tallón wrote: > Enrico Zini wrote: > We haven't got any feedback on this for ages (mostly my fault, i must > admit). > A possibility to check wether this works (a new upstream version > supposedly fixes bugs, right?) is to let people test it, warning them > before.
Yes. Since you can't be sure that the upload has fixed the patch, since the exact nature of the bug hadn't been pinpointed, the correct procedure is to upload the new upstream version, leave the bug open and ask the submitter if they could please try again to reproduce the bug. Which is indeed very hard because it would involve obscure and dangerous filesystem operations. Of course if the submitter doesn't reply after a while and noone confirms the bug still exists, you can consider closing it. But in this case (filesystem corruption, better tools exist, upstream is dead, you're considering asking for removal of the package), I guess one could just leave the bug there. > Enrico: I thought that you agreed with this, after seeing your reply to > my last e-mail... must have misunderstood, sorry. > You will see that i have filed another RC bug against this, more clearly > explaining this issue (i think). Yes, it is my mistake. I thought that the idea of leaving an RC bug open also involved leaving this RC bug open, and I didn't pay too much attention about it when reviewing the changelog. Sorry about that, now the bug is open again and everthing should be back to normal :) Ciao, Enrico -- GPG key: 1024D/797EBFAB 2000-12-05 Enrico Zini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
