Thijs Kinkhorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello Walter, > > > reopen 370295 > > > > Please do not reopen this bug again. > > > > This bug has not been resolved. So I have reopened it. Please do not > > close it until it has been resolved. Getting an answer to the > > questions I posted will resolve this bug. > > I'm looking through the RC-buglist for etch and noticed this bug. I'm > surprised by your recent reopening of this bug. > > I've read it and the following applies: > * The package maintainer is of the opinion that this is not a bug; > * The Debian FTP-master is of the opinion that this is not a bug;
I see the maintainer (Matthias) saying that he needs some clarifications from Sun. I see a comaintainer and FTP assistant (Jeroen) at times saying it is not a bug, and at other times saying that I should open a new bug. So it is not clear to me what the collective opinion of the maintainers is. If the collective opinion has coalesced, then I would love to hear it. > * The upstream copyright holder is of the opinion that this is not a > bug; Upstream initially felt the same way about #370296. Upstream was eventually persuaded to clarify the license and the bug was closed. That has not yet happened with this bug. I honestly do not know what upstream really wants here. > You act like you're authorised to override these people's decisions. >From the developers reference [1] If the bug submitter disagrees with your decision to close the bug, they may reopen it until you find an agreement on how to handle it. I have asked some questions to upstream, and we are now waiting for them to respond. Upstream has been fairly responsive, so I am hopeful that this can be resolved soon. Cheers, Walter Landry [EMAIL PROTECTED] [1] http://www.debian.org/doc/developers-reference/ch-pkgs.en.html#s-bug-housekeeping -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
