Your message dated Sun, 18 Mar 2012 23:04:43 +0100
with message-id <[email protected]>
and subject line Re: Bug#556245: src:gnucash: Gnucash should not use copies of
code from other packages
has caused the Debian Bug report #556245,
regarding Gnucash should not use copies of code from other packages
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [email protected]
immediately.)
--
556245: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=556245
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Source: gnucash
Version: 2.2.9-0.2
Hi,
this is just a reminder from the upgrade checklist for
Debian Policy 3.8.0.0:
* Debian packages should not use convience copies of code from
other packages unless the included package is explicitly
intended to be used that way. [4.13]
The directory lib/ contains (among others) the QOF library, and the
./configure output shows that it's really used right now:
configure: External QOF Disabled. Using Internal QOF Code.
Gnucash should depend on libqof-dev and use the external QOF library
instead.
I haven't checked the other copies of code located in lib/ yet, so
before closing the bug make sure no code from this directory is used
during build.
Regards
Micha
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Dmitry Smirnov <[email protected]> writes:
> On Mon, 19 Mar 2012 08:25:26 Sébastien Villemot wrote:
>> Also raising the severity to normal, since the violation of a "should"
>> in Policy (§4.13 in this case) is obviously not of severity wishlist.
>
> I think we can close this bug because there is no external library we could
> use. It is now clear that the code in question is private to gnucash and
> existing fork is not suitable for use (and hardly will ever be).
>
> Therefore there is no policy violation and no reason to keep this bug open.
> I would have close it but I set severity 'wishlist' instead because I had
> reasonable suspicion that you might disagree if I just close it.
Lowering the severity is clearly not a good way of recording the fact
that a bug should probably be closed.
If you are unsure whether a bug should be closed or not, the right way
is to ask in the bug report, as you are now doing.
> In my view it doesn't qualify for severity 'normal' unless there are any
> other
> components to unbundle (I'm not aware of any).
Clearly, if the bug was real, it would qualify (at least) for "normal"
because it is the violation of a "should" in the policy.
But since it is not real (Debian's libqof-dev is a fork of Gnucash's
which cannot be used as a drop-in replacement, though the two share a
lot in common), I am therefore closing this bug as you suggested.
--
Sébastien Villemot
Researcher in Economics & Debian Maintainer
http://www.dynare.org/sebastien
Phone: +33-1-40-77-84-04 - GPG Key: 4096R/381A7594
pgpyhS42VXMkL.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--- End Message ---
