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 way you seem to intend. The > >> bugs closed in changelogs are suppose to be bugs closed due to the > >> changes from the previous version to the current version. If you only > >> mean to do, > >> > >> * Close bugs that were fixed VERY long time ago (closes: > >> #123,#234,#345,#456,#567,#678,#789,....) > >> > >> then I don't think that is appropriate use of the changelog. > >> > > > > Closing bugs through the changelog is an officially supported method > > and most DDs close bugs that way. Submitters receive a detailed > > notification by email as soon as the package is uploaded. > > > > I have no special mean to close bugs without informing the submitters > > with a clear and detailed explanation as I always did with all my > > packages.
I'm stunned that anyone still thinks that closing unrelated bugs in a changelog is a good idea. [EMAIL PROTECTED] sends the detailed close message to the submitter, and it doesn't make it look like the problem was fixed in that version (which, of course, it wasn't). > 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? I was always > under impression that *old* bugs should be closed by sending an email to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] saying that you are closing it because it was > fixed some time ago, etc.. etc.. Absolutely. There's some debate over whether closing upstream bugs in the changelog is OK, like so: * New upstream version. (Closes: #NNNNN) - The bar is now frobbed correctly. (Closes: #XXXXX) - No longer trip over our shoelaces. (Closes: #YYYYY) * Random package installation failures stopped. (Closes: #PPPP) Some people think that it shouldn't be done ever, since it's not a change that the maintainer explicitly made, but others think that it's OK when done like that shown above, as it preserves all of the useful information. But I can't think of *any* discussion which has ended with people claiming that closing random bugs is OK in an upload. How would you even describe it in the changelog? * The bug has magically disappeared. (Closes: #NNN) Uhhh... I doubt it. - Matt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]