On Fri, May 25, 2007 at 09:18:19AM +0300, Damyan Ivanov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > -=| Mike Hommey, Fri, 25 May 2007 08:12:15 +0200 |=- > > On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 11:41:49PM +0300, Damyan Ivanov > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > -=| Mike Hommey, Thu, 24 May 2007 19:39:20 +0200 |=- > > > > A standard example of this are bugs in applications that are due > > > > to bugs in libraries they depend on. Users would report bugs on > > > > the application, but it would be reassigned to the library. Next > > > > users reporting the bug would not see it in the list of bugs for > > > > the application with reportbug. > > > > > > How about cloning the bug, reassigning the clone to the library and > > > making the "original" bug be blocked by the clone? > > > > Sadly, the block stuff doesn't even notify the blocked bug when the > > blocker bug is closed... > > This is #323663, I guess. > > Is the other solution (proposed by Don) - reassign #nnnnn A,B going to > work in your case?
Doesn't that fuck up versioning tracking of the BTS ? Mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
