[pkg-fso-maint] How to manage bugs (was Re: fso-frameworkd: fix for https://docs.openmoko.org/trac/ticket/1309 not implemented?)

[Luca Capello]

Hi Philipp!

On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 18:29:37 +0200, Philipp Kern wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 24, 2008 at 07:21:43PM +0300, Timo Juhani Lindfors wrote:
>> Package: fso-frameworkd
>> Version: 0.2.0-git20080805-7
>> 
>> See http://trac.freesmartphone.org/ticket/109
>
> Maybe we want a "Bugs: mailto:pkg-fso-maint at lists.alioth.debian.org" in
> the source stanza of the "unofficial" packages?  (See pkg-fso-keyring's
> source package for details.)

You mean that we should stop using the Debian BTS for the unofficial
packages?  I'm against that, because:

1) the pkg-fso packages will eventually enter Debian (the sooner the
   better, at least for the infrastruture advantages)

2) we don't need to setup another BTS

3) we (should) have a clear idea of what is Debian-specific (i.e. not
   tagged upstream and forwarded) and what isn't


And I take the opportunity to raise some more questions :-)

a) should we define a pkg-fso usertag to keep track of all bugs related
   to the FreeRunner?  I mean, not only bugs in our packages, but in all
   packages that "compromise" Debian on the FreeRunner.  This will also
   help to have a complete view of all the problems

b) what should we do with upstream bugs?  I always prefer that end users
   file a Debian bug *before* filing an upstream one (like the bug
   Philipp was replying to), but this is my personal feeling.  Others?

Thx, bye,
Gismo / Luca
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 314 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-fso-maint/attachments/20080825/56175f9b/attachment.pgp