On Sun, Jan 22, 2006 at 02:26:57AM -0800, Scott Ritchie wrote: [snip] > In the case of such a package, the same fixes by the Debian maintainer > to the Debian package do end up in the contents of the Ubuntu package > when it gets resynched. > > Now, before I confuse myself with word games and contemplate whether > that implies "control" or not, I'm going to offer up the conjecture that > bug reports on an Ubuntu universe package are potentially more relevant > to a Debian maintainer than bug reports on a Debian stable package, > since they're closer to the current unstable.
Since all Ubuntu packages are recompiled against a different set of libraries, the bug might not even affect the Debian package, even though they share the same source. Hence having Ubuntu developers triage the bugs to rule out such issues before they are forwarded to Debian's BTS is always a good thing; thus the maintainer field should be changed for *binary packages*. The source is the same, so the field should NOT be changed for *source packages*. If the bug indeed exists in both Ubuntu and Debian, then the bug is in the source and needs fixing in Debian too, but if the bug is caused by the Ubuntu build environment, then the bug is purely in the package, and any bugreport would just waste the Debian developer's time, *AND* risk Ubuntu losing vital information about a bug in their build environment. Regards: David -- /) David Weinehall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> /) Rime on my window (\ // ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ // Diamond-white roses of fire // \) http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/ (/ Beautiful hoar-frost (/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
