[Max Bowsher] > Oh, OK. I freely admit to being inexperienced with the Debian BTS. > My interpretation of the above was that it was not applicable in this > case, since I don't know which version fixed it, only that is was > fixed at some point between the two versions that I tested. It is > quite likely it was fixed in 1.2.0-1, but I'm not easily able to tell > for sure.
Yeah, absolute accuracy isn't all that important here - it's not worth spending effort determining *exactly* which release fixed a bug. We just put in what we know - "it existed in 1.0.2, it seems to have been fixed on or before 1.2.3." The biggest use for version tracking is to determine whether shipped releases are likely to have the bug. sarge shipped with subversion 1.1.4, etch has 1.2.3 now, and will ship with 1.3.x or (unlikely) 1.4.x. So this granularity is fine for that purpose. Version tracking is pretty new, but now that we have it, an unversioned bug close is taken to imply that, e.g., it wasn't really a bug in the first place, or it was a side effect of a bug in some other package and fixed without need for action on our part.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
