On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 7:13 PM, Derick Eisenhardt<[email protected]> wrote:
> This is really how we should be treating documentation and bugs. If a > bug is found in Turbogears that is a result of one of your upstream > components, let's say SQLA for example. You shouldn't mark the bug as > "won't fix/invalid" and tell the user, "sorry...that's an SQLAlchemy > bug, not our problem". You should keep the bug open here, and mark it > as dependent on a corresponding bug on the SQLA site. Once SQLA fixes > the bug, then the bug can also be closed here. This is really the kind > of things I think could turn this from a really good project, to a > great project ;) And this is what we do :) I propose regular patches to upstream maintainers and wait for them to incorporate them before reporting the bug as closed on our side... and anyone that already did that kind of stuff knows it takes time, effort and perseverance to follow-up all the upstream bugtrackers. (http://www.sqlalchemy.org/trac/ticket/1291, http://www.sqlalchemy.org/trac/ticket/1282) I don't say we always do it, but frankly that is the TG community way of thinking, which is the reason lots of us are active in upstream packages. Florent. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TurboGears Trunk" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/turbogears-trunk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
