What the "fix released" status really means?
wxl at ubuntu.com
Wed Sep 28 14:13:37 UTC 2016
On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 6:42 AM, Alberto Salvia Novella <
es20490446e at gmail.com> wrote:
> Is it appropiate to mark a bug as fixed in the Ubuntu package if it's only
> fixed in a ppa or upstream but not in release?
In general, I'd say yes. If the PPA or upstream location will get
automagically pulled down to release, then yes, it's appropriate. Since
every upstream location is either in Debian or some known location (usually
Launchpad), it's safe to assume that the fix will come down the pike.
The one edge case I can think of is when it's fixed in an individual's PPA
that is unrelated to the actual development of the package, then I'd say
no. I've seen this kind of thing occur before and it's wonderful to have
people fixing stuff on their own, but unless it's in the actual development
stream, it's likely to get lost in the ether.
I think this logic follows the logic of marking something fixed when it is
fixed in a development version of Ubuntu or fixed in a version of Ubuntu
greater than the original reporter's version. In other words, they may not
be able to immediately install the fix, but eventually they should have
access to it after a version upgrade.
In this case, QR Tools main development is in Launchpad. It's pushed up to
Debian and Ubuntu pulls it down. So yep, makes sense.
@wxl | polka.bike
C563 CAC5 8BE1 2F22 A49D
68F6 8B57 A48B C4F2 051A
More information about the Ubuntu-quality