Your bug description is a really good start, but I have a few more
questions before we can proceed with this.

The goal from here is to identify problems with the update that may
arise. I will admit to not being intimately familiar with Mixxx, but the
idea is to not add any bugs in the process. If something was buggy in
2.1.3 and is still buggy in in 2.2.0, that is acceptable for an SRU, but
our goal is to identify bugs that exist in 2.2.0 but don't exist in
2.1.3. Usually, a review of the diff between 2.1.3 and 2.2.0 is
sufficient to see which parts of the package have been affected, and
those parts are then tested (which makes cherry-picking patches
preferable), but as I noted before, the diff is very large. My point
here is, the potential ramifications of this update should be verbosely
stated in the bug report, and a somewhat brief analysis of the features
and changes between the two versions should be completed.

That being said, in my personal opinion, your justification warrants an
update; please state some of the issues in the bug description. How
badly is the package broken currently? Instead of linking the bug page,
it helps reviewers take a look at the potential benefits of including
this update. As a packager, I can then add the bugs to the changelog,
which involves them in the process, and we can make sure that each of
the bugfixes individually have been addressed.

Thank you for your patience on this, we're getting closer to a solution.
:)

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1804513

Title:
  Cosmic:  Mixxx 2.1.3 is not stable with Qt5

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/mixxx/+bug/1804513/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

Reply via email to