On 19/05/08 at 09:14 +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: > 'morning Neil and everybody. So many mails to read for breakfast! > > Le Sun, May 18, 2008 at 03:51:18PM +0100, Neil Williams a écrit : > > proposal: > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (Fixes: #nnn) > > marks the bug as fixed by a patch added by Debian and > > awaiting a new release upstream to be finally closed. > > nnn-fixed is ignored if the upstream tag is not already > > set. Bugs can be fixed in the changelog of an upload using > > (Fixes: #1234) in a similar manner to (Closes: #1234). The > > principle usage of "fixed" is to denote points at which > > Debian diverges from upstream. Filenames of patch files must > > be clearly identified when using (Fixes: #1234) in the > > changelog. > > Even simpler: Fixes: #nnn downgrades the severity to wishlist, adds "To > be merged upstream:" to the subject, and sends a message saying "This > bug has been fixed by patching the original sources; we will forward > this patch to the upstream authors and close this bug report when > upgrading the Debian package to an upstream source in which the patch > has been merged or obsoleted".
Take a bug #111, severity:serious, affecting unstable,testing,stable. The maintainer fixes the bug in unstable using a Debian patch. Following your process, the bug is now downgraded to wishlist. Meaning that RC #111 bug in stable suddenly became a wishlist bug. We don't want that! Could someone summarize again the different features that we require for the "BTS tracks patches sent upstream" thing? I can think of: - the new features must not change the existing workflow, when not using the BTS to track upstream patches. - the submitter should still know when the bug is fixed in Debian (= when he can upgrade the package and expect it to work as supposed) - the maintainer and upstream need a way to list the patches that were submitted upstream but not integrated yet. - the process must not break the tracking of bugs in other suites Anything else? The current solution proposed by Don is: add a divergence tags that can be used to mark bugs about patches sent upstream ; don't archive closed bugs tagged divergence. This is good, because it avoids duplicating all the version-tracking for a "fixed-with-a-patch" state that will only be useful for a few packages. Those who don't need the feature won't see it. Two additional changes could be made as well, to help with the process: 1) add parsing for Closes-with-patch: in changelog. This closes the bug normally, and also tags the bug + divergence. sounds non-disruptive. 2) slightly change behaviour of Closes:. do as usual, and if the bug is tagged divergence, remove the tag. -- | Lucas Nussbaum | [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ | | jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F | -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]