David Gerard wrote: > On 3 August 2010 00:17, Edward Z. Yang <ezy...@mit.edu> wrote: > > >> 2. Distributors roll patches without telling upstream developers who >> would happily accept them into the mainline. > > > Has anyone reported the following as Debian bugs? > > * Package maintainer not sending patches back upstream > * Package maintainer not visible and active in MediaWiki development > * Package maintainer not visible and active in MediaWiki community > support, leaving supporting his packages to the upstream > > > - d.
In fact, one of their patches was sent upstream a couple of months ago and we didn't react to it. https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=24132 It's a documentation patch, fine as it is, although i'd prefer to fix that by moving dumpBackup to the new Maintenance style. Other patches are not so fine... wfSuppressWarnings(); - session_start(); + @session_start(); wfRestoreWarnings(); Sure, it was for FusionForge package, but still what error would session_start produce that is not trapped? (I can only make an E_NOTICE or E_WARNING...) _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
