On Jun 22, 12:47 pm, Florent Aide <[email protected]> wrote: > 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.
I wasn't sure if that was the case or not, if so that's great to hear :) --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
