Mart Raudsepp wrote:

> I've been operating on the premise that I am the maintainer of the
> package in question and marking it as WONTFIX and making it depend on
> the removal bug while at it. I don't see what's wrong in that..
> If the removal gets reverted, all the depending bugs should be seen and
> acted upon. Why should we keep bugs open in our maintainer bugs list if
> we are 99% sure the package will get removed? We aren't treecleaners
> project, but the maintainers of the packages whose bug we are marking
> WONTFIX with the almost certain assumption the package will get removed
> soon...

Even if you are the maintainer, it's far from unheard of that when
someone finds their favorite package has been masked they pop up and
offer to take it off your hands.  That's besides the point though.  My
mail was more concerning packages that don't have a dedicated maintainer
caring for them.  I should have been more clear about that.  Anyways,
the goal here is to keep bugs from getting lost.  As long as there's
some mechanism in place to prevent that from happening it shouldn't
matter how its implemented.  I don't really get why some ppl can't stand
having open bugs, but hey. ;)


-- 
dirtyepic                 salesman said this vacuum's guaranteed
 gentoo org          it could suck an ancient virus from the sea
  9B81 6C9F E791 83BB 3AB3  5B2D E625 A073 8379 37E8 (0x837937E8)

-- 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list

Reply via email to