Joey Hess writes: > Christoph Martin wrote: > > We have a problem with the bug tracking system as long as we can't > > really find out to which versions of a package a bug really > > applies. We only mosttimes have the version of the packages where a > > problem showed up. But we don't know if the bug was introduced with > > this version or also applies to older ones. And in the case of > > different distributions, if the bug was reported eg. for frozen we > > don't know if it also exists in newer versions which are allready in > > unstable. This is also a problem if a bug which is in one distribution > > (like frozen or stable) gets fixed in another (unstable). Another > > issue is, that some bugs only appear in special architectures (like > > hurd, or powerpc). We really need a way to specify exactly to which > > version a version applies. > > > > As long as we don't have this feature we can't really get the > > "testing" distribution to work. > > Well this is why bug reproducability is so important. I don't see how a > magic bullet to fix this issue is at all possible though.
So, what is the policy to do with a package for the "testing" distribution, if there is an important bug? Do you remove the package unconditionaly or do you try investigate (like in the rc buglist) if the bug really applies? C
