Santiago Vila wrote: > If you can't see how it helps to have a bug on the BTS that someone > reproduced at the time it was submitted then you don't understand how > the BTS works. Please do not manipulate bugs in the BTS if you don't > understand how the BTS works. > > A bug is not fixed automatically by waiting some amount of time or > just because new upstream releases happened. A bug is fixed when it's fixed. This is getting tired. We both know how the BTS works. Various ways to insult you as you did come to mind, but is there a need to go there? Can we keep this discussion on the facts?
- When we close bugs, we almost *never* know if it is actually fixed in a release. We make a judgement that may be wrong. That's why "reopen" exists in the first place. - There have been 48 releases of pwlib since the bug was initially reported. The possibility that this bug was fixed in one of these was quite high. - The usual way to close such a bug is for the submitter(s) to test if it is fixed or not. You were asked for an update and didn't respond for 2 and a half years. - Therefore, there were probable fixes and no feedback. Closing the bug is the most sensible option. - Moreover, there's always the option of re-opening the bug, if it exists. And you did that. And I'm happy for that (well, as happy as one can be on a bug report) since that was one of the acceptable scenarios. Next time, if you don't want to be annoyed to see one of the bugs that you submit close, please respond when the maintainer asks you for feedback. On the bug itself, it'd be nice if you provided more info, since you have the technical skills for that (being a DD etc.) Kilian? Regards, Faidon -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
