So I cleaned out the spam trap...

Matt Zimmerman mdz at
Mon Oct 16 12:27:04 BST 2006

On Fri, Oct 13, 2006 at 04:31:12PM +1300, Matthew Paul Thomas wrote:
> On Oct 13, 2006, at 3:19 PM, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 13, 2006 at 02:55:49PM +1300, Matthew Paul Thomas wrote:
> > ...
> >> The Launchpad model is that where a bug also exists in Debian, you can
> >> link the Ubuntu bug report to the equivalent Debian bug report. Then 
> >> if the bug is fixed in Debian first, Launchpad will notify you.
> >>
> >> That way you don't have to trawl through a list of bugs fixed in
> >> Debian. On the other hand, you do have to link Ubuntu bugs to their
> >> equivalent Debian bugs in the first place.
> >
> > If a bug in Launchpad is linked to a Debian bug, we are already 
> > notified. This is about the other 99% of Debian bugs, of which 
> > Launchpad is currently ignorant.
> > ...
> Right. So what I meant to say is, is that a problem? Should Launchpad 
> know about a greater proportion of the Debian bugs? If so, how can we 
> make it easier to link an Ubuntu bug to a Debian one?
> Alternatively, if we can never get 100% linkage, is it a waste of time 
> linking in the first place, since that won't reduce the traffic of the 
> fixed-in-Debian mailing list, so it will be more work overall?

Let me explain; this isn't really about linking.

Because Ubuntu and Debian have so much common code, it turns out that we
share a large proportion of our bugs as well.  Therefore, for a given Debian
bug, it's rather likely that it is also present in Ubuntu and therefore
relevant to us.

When we used Bugzilla, we took advantage of this by importing all Debian
bugs of a certain minimum severity into Bugzilla so that we could track
their status in Ubuntu.  Since moving our bug tracking to Launchpad, we've
lost this useful resource.

 - mdz

More information about the ubuntu-devel mailing list