On Mon, 2002-10-21 at 18:15, Branden Robinson wrote: > On Mon, Oct 21, 2002 at 01:21:00PM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 21, 2002 at 02:45:44PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > > > Whining about Debian developers whining about upstream implies that you > > > expect Debian developers to fix every problem. For instance, I suppose > > > > My problem is some developers will tell the user to submit it > > upstream, when my understanding is the devel is supposed to flag it as > > upstream and go submit it upstream themselves, since they're supposed > > to have an idea what bugs are upstream anyway, and know how to provide > > more helpful input for upstream. > > And sometimes the Debian developer can't really be helpful. > > I, for instance, have *never* had any luck acting as a go-between for > Debian users and upstream XFree86 problems. The upstream XFree86 guys > *always* seem to want to deal with the user directly. > > This, and the lack of a bug tracking system for the XFree86 Project, is > why I don't mark XFree86 bugs as forwarded in the Debian BTS. > > I enjoy what I think is a good working relationship with XFree86 > upstream despite the fact that the Developers' Reference tells me to do > things differently than I do. It is better to be accomodating of > upstream than to mindlessly adhere to a Debian-specific best practices > document. In this case, our users are better served the way I'm doing > it, because that's how XFree86 wants to handle things. Who am I to tell > them to change their ways? > > -- > G. Branden Robinson | Convictions are more dangerous > Debian GNU/Linux | enemies of truth than lies. > [EMAIL PROTECTED] | -- Friedrich Nietzsche > http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |
I would also interject that sometimes, particularly when dealing with package maintainers looking after numerous diverse packages, tracking the design details of every aspect of each package *may not* be a reasonable expectation, and particularly when the bug is unclear in its nature or source, it is better to have upstream ask the questions to get a clear description of what is happening, especially when a user hasn't *quite* explained it clearly. My understanding is that the original intention of the Debian BTS was to be about packaging bugs - it has evolved beyond that partly as it is handy to report any bugs, and for users that don't recognise the difference between distributions and developers of specific software (which *does* on occasion happen amongst Debian users,) it can be the only address available to pass on problems, whether actually appropriate or not. I don't fault the *two routes* approach to kicking bugs upstream. So long as it is effective, it is all part of the bazaar approach of Free & Open Source sorfware and the volunteer nature of Debian. -- Mark L. Kahnt, FLMI/M, ALHC, HIA, AIAA, ACS, MHP ML Kahnt New Markets Consulting Tel: (613) 531-8684 / (613) 539-0935 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
