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
