[Evolution] Bug#586174: Proper handling of upstream bugs

Philip Hands phil at hands.com
Sat Jul 31 13:43:59 UTC 2010

Hi Yves-Alexis,

I draw your attention to:


Specifically the second sentence of the first paragraph, which you
appear to have forgotten, where it says:

  You have to forward these bug reports to the upstream developers...

I note that the construction "have to" should probably read as "MUST"
instead, as per RFC usage, but it is reasonably definite even as it is.

If we start discouraging bugs on the basis that we're rather busy, then
the knowledge contained in the bugs will be lost, and will be
unavailable to others who find the same bug.  Since you are confident
that it's an upstream issue, it is to your advantage to have it recorded
in the BTS and marked as forwarded upstream, as that should prevent the
next person to find it from bothering you, and you never know, it might
even get fixed.

Cheers, Phil.
|)|  Philip Hands [+44 (0)20 8530 9560]    http://www.hands.com/
|-|  HANDS.COM Ltd.                    http://www.uk.debian.org/
|(|  10 Onslow Gardens, South Woodford, London  E18 1NE  ENGLAND
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 835 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-evolution-maintainers/attachments/20100731/826e02b0/attachment.pgp>

More information about the Pkg-evolution-maintainers mailing list