On Sun, Jun 15, 2008 at 12:44, Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Sandro Tosi writes: >> On Sun, Jun 15, 2008 at 06:36, Ben Finney wrote: >> > I expect to have this branch ready to merge into trunk fairly >> > soon. Does anyone have any objection to me doing so? >> >> My only concern is: do you really think that a package with 200+ >> bugs opened need aestetical or architectural changes instead of >> bugfixes? > > I think that one of the reasons the package has so many open bugs for > so long is because the code base needs fixes for numerous > architectural and coding-style problems. > > They need to be addressed gradually, so as to minimise disruption and > keep everything working, but leaving them unaddressed makes the entire > code base difficult to maintain.
so, you're proposing to postpone the bugs fixing after architectural changes? what about lenny? it's coming every day nearer... wasn't reportbug-ng removed from testing because of old bugs unaddressed? would we ship reportbug in lenny like it's now or a better one? from a user perspective, code reorg is hidden, what they see are functionalities, and functs are "freezed" (no additions/changes/removals) while moving code here and there. that's why I think it's better to leave such things for lenny+1 and trying to fix bugs for lenny (and july is the distro freeze, 1 month and half left), IMHO. Sandro -- Sandro Tosi (aka morph, Morpheus, matrixhasu) My website: http://matrixhasu.altervista.org/ Me at Debian: http://wiki.debian.org/SandroTosi _______________________________________________ Reportbug-maint mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/reportbug-maint
