Don Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 14 Mar 2007, Frank Küster wrote: >> > From: Don Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> > Subject: Closing; reopen if it reappears >> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 00:05:24 -0700 >> > Mail-Followup-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > >> > Since this hasn't been seen in a while, I'm closing this report. If it >> > recurs, reopen. >> >> I don't object. I would, however, like to say that I am a bit irritated >> that you added a "moreinfo" tag without Cc'ing any of the people who >> had provided information so far... > > Uh... except that I did: > > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=340713;msg=30
Ah, yes, you did ask us. But you didn't Cc anyone when you tagged it, and this is what I find confusing: I looked into #334884, found the moreinfo tagged, wondered about it, and didn't find any information about it. That message No. 30 was sent three months earlier and only to one of the bugs. I'm not claiming that you didn't handle it correctly. But still, I'd prefer to be Cc'ed on messages that tag bugs that I submitted with "moreinfo" or "unreproducible". I also don't understand why you tagged it moreinfo. There's lots of information in it, sufficient I'd say; what is missing is an analysis of the BTS code that caused it, but IMHO that's not what should be expressed with a moreinfo tag. Anyway, don't bother to anwer, let's instead do something useful... Regards, Frank -- Dr. Frank Küster Single Molecule Spectroscopy, Protein Folding @ Inst. f. Biochemie, Univ. Zürich Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
