Bug status after a package downgrade

[Philip Muskovac]

On 04/25/2010 01:11 PM, Omer Akram wrote:
> On Sun, 2010-04-25 at 12:45 +0200, Marcel Stimberg wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> so, being a freshly approved member of the team, here's my first question :-)
>>
>> It's regarding bugs for the gthumb package in Lucid (probably applies
>> to other packages as well). During alpha and beta, the version of
>> gthumb was 2.11.2 but it was decided that it is not stable enough and
>> to revert back to the version in karmic (2.10.11). So now the version
>> is "2.11.2.1.is.2.10.11". There are a couple of bug reports against
>> 2.11.2 which do not apply to 2.10 (many of them are marked as
>> regressions). What would be the correct bug status if the problem does
>> not occur with the currently shipped version? Simply "invalid", or
>> "fix released"? From a user perspective, the latest package update
>> (i.e. downgrade) fixed the bug, but "invalid" seems more natural to
>> me.
>>
>> Thanks, best
>>    Marcel
>>
>
> Invalid here would be the right status with the comment that the problem
> was in the newer version of the app but due to the problems with that
> version we decided to stick to the older version. or something like
> that :-)
>
> Regards!
>
>
>

Please at least make sure the bugs are reported upstream before closing 
them as we will propably get the newer verion in maverick again where 
they will be valid again. They're just invalid for lucid.

Yofel