Bug#213501: Status check
I'm happy to report this problem has gone away with the upgrade to 4.3. Perhaps it's time to close this bug? On Wed, 2004-02-18 at 23:38, Branden Robinson wrote: > On Wed, Feb 18, 2004 at 06:18:22PM -0800, Ross Boylan wrote: > > I notice this bug is tagged moreinfo, unreproducible, but also upstream. > > In reviewing this bug, and the ones it is merged with, I don't see where > > the moreinfo and unreproducible came from. Unfortunately, it continues > > to be very reproducible for me. I've also received no requests for more > > info that I'm aware of. > > > > So, is there anything I can do that would help? > > > > Alternately, perhaps the moreinfo and unreproducible tags could be taken > > off? (I'm guessing when bugs are merged all their tags are merged, > > though, as I said, I didn't see the tags being applied to any of them). > > It's unreproducible by me. If it's reproducible by another member of > the XSF team, I'd be very happy if they'd step up and claim owner ship > of it (e.g., "bts owner 213501 [EMAIL PROTECTED]"). > > > Also, is one of the bugs now the "master" bug for this problem, where we > > might look to see progress and work-arounds? > > I generally try to use the lowest-numbered bug report in the merged set > for this purpose. -- Ross Boylan wk: (415) 502-4031 530 Parnassus Avenue (Library) rm 115-4 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dept of Epidemiology and Biostatistics fax: (415) 476-9856 University of California, San Francisco San Francisco, CA 94143-0840 hm: (415) 550-1062
Bug#213501: Status check
On Wed, Feb 18, 2004 at 06:18:22PM -0800, Ross Boylan wrote: > I notice this bug is tagged moreinfo, unreproducible, but also upstream. > In reviewing this bug, and the ones it is merged with, I don't see where > the moreinfo and unreproducible came from. Unfortunately, it continues > to be very reproducible for me. I've also received no requests for more > info that I'm aware of. > > So, is there anything I can do that would help? > > Alternately, perhaps the moreinfo and unreproducible tags could be taken > off? (I'm guessing when bugs are merged all their tags are merged, > though, as I said, I didn't see the tags being applied to any of them). It's unreproducible by me. If it's reproducible by another member of the XSF team, I'd be very happy if they'd step up and claim owner ship of it (e.g., "bts owner 213501 [EMAIL PROTECTED]"). > Also, is one of the bugs now the "master" bug for this problem, where we > might look to see progress and work-arounds? I generally try to use the lowest-numbered bug report in the merged set for this purpose. -- G. Branden Robinson| That's the saving grace of humor: Debian GNU/Linux | if you fail, no one is laughing at [EMAIL PROTECTED] | you. http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | -- A. Whitney Brown signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#213501: Status check
I notice this bug is tagged moreinfo, unreproducible, but also upstream. In reviewing this bug, and the ones it is merged with, I don't see where the moreinfo and unreproducible came from. Unfortunately, it continues to be very reproducible for me. I've also received no requests for more info that I'm aware of. So, is there anything I can do that would help? Alternately, perhaps the moreinfo and unreproducible tags could be taken off? (I'm guessing when bugs are merged all their tags are merged, though, as I said, I didn't see the tags being applied to any of them). Also, is one of the bugs now the "master" bug for this problem, where we might look to see progress and work-arounds? Thanks.
