On Mon, May 26, 2003 at 11:16:51AM +0200, Gerfried Fuchs wrote: > You are plainly misusing your changelog for closing #190302. This has > *nothing* to do in the changelog, there are no *changes* in this upload > that address this. Rather send a mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] explaining why > you close them.
I agree on this, but > Btw., your line for "Upstream fix: closes:" is not very helpful for the > bug submitters neither. They'd have to check their records to see what > this bug really was. Please add informations on what was fixed so it can > be seen offline, too. I really don't see the point in this. Submitters always have a copy of their report, so they have evrything they need. "New upstream closes: #1, #2, #3" implyes an update of the upstream changelog file so it's worth of checking: listing changes already documented would be redundant and not so helpful. ciao, -- Luca - De Whiskey's - De Vitis | Elegant or ugly code as well aliases: Luca ^De [A-Z][A-Za-z\-]*[iy]'\?s$ | as fine or rude sentences have Luca, a wannabe ``Good guy''. | something in common: they local LANG="[EMAIL PROTECTED]" | don't depend on the language.
