Adam,
Here is what I meant, clearly:
I took over the gnuplot package last week but I've only fixed 2 bugs
out of 40.
It's a shame because I'm supposed to handle them all when taking over
the package and I did not.
I'll do that as soon as possible but in the meanwhile, I've uploaded
that
On Sat, Apr 08, 2006 at 05:55:05PM -0500, Adam Majer wrote:
My question is, is it now appropriate to use the changelog as a crutch
to close bugs that have nothing to do with the upload?
No; however, in this case, the bugs *did* have something to do with the
upload.
I was always under
Matthew Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
There's some debate over whether closing upstream bugs in the changelog is
OK, like so:
* New upstream version. (Closes: #N)
- The bar is now frobbed correctly. (Closes: #X)
- No longer trip over our shoelaces. (Closes: #Y)
It seems to me that, in this case (and correct me if I'm wrong), the
package hasn't been updated from upstream for a long time, and so the
difference between the old version and the new version fixes the stack
of old bugs (( even though it wasn't _this specific version_ where the
bug was fixed
Stephen Samuel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It seems to me that, in this case (and correct me if I'm wrong), the
package hasn't been updated from upstream for a long time, and so the
difference between the old version and the new version fixes the stack
of old bugs (( even though it wasn't
On 9 Apr 2006, Adam Majer wrote:
My question is, is it now appropriate to use the changelog as a
crutch to close bugs that have nothing to do with the upload?
Adam,
Apparently you still haven't understood my changelog nor my email: I
haven't closed any bug that have nothing to do with the
On Sat, Apr 08, 2006 at 05:55:05PM -0500, Adam Majer wrote:
Cyril Bouthors wrote:
On 3 Apr 2006, Adam Majer wrote:
But the correct method of closing bugs is to send a message to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with the explanation of the fix and not in
the changelog. Well, at least not in the
7 matches
Mail list logo