Gosh, I hate these kind of discussions! The time and efforts you already spent on this probably even surpass the ressources required to fix the actual bug.
Let.us.just.fix.the.code. Dang! > On Feb 4, 2016, at 10:41 PM, Thorsten Glaser <[email protected]> wrote: > > Finn Thain dixit: >> On Wed, 3 Feb 2016, Thorsten Glaser wrote: > >>>>>>>>> [package maintainers] don't care about dpo >>> [...] >>> Multiply this by the amount of packages I deal with, because almost no >>> two use the same bugtracker. >>> [...] >>> DevRef clearly says that this *is* the package maintainer's job. > > This specific quoting brings two things together which don’t. > >> What does DevRef etc say about dpo? > > dpo is not Debian, although it’s general policy (not Policy though) > to support it best-effort. As such, DevRef is silent on it AFAIK. > > However, this paragraph is pretty clear: > > ┌──┤ 3.1.4. Coordination with upstream developers ├───────────────────┐ > │ │ > │ A big part of your job as Debian maintainer will be to stay in │ > │ contact with the upstream developers. Debian users will sometimes │ > │ report bugs that are not specific to Debian to our bug tracking │ > │ system. You have to forward these bug reports to the upstream │ > │ developers so that they can be fixed in a future upstream │ > │ release. │ > │ │ > └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ > > This means that Debian maintainers even *have to* forward bugs to > upstream which a Debian user reported against the Debian package > even if the bug occurs on, say, Raspian or possibly even SuSE. > (Rationale is probably that such bugs often do affect Debian too. > In the case of dpo, this can become tau if a port is promoted, > like s390x was.) > > bye, > //mirabilos > -- > Stéphane, I actually don’t block Googlemail, they’re just too utterly > stupid to successfully deliver to me (or anyone else using Greylisting > and not whitelisting their ranges). Same for a few other providers such > as Hotmail. Some spammers (Yahoo) I do block.
